You said that I ignore that fact that Brazil had other key players in the NT because I said "he took Brazil to the final" that isn't true. I recognize Brazil had Rivaldo and other good players. However, that team got 10 goals scored on them, that's a record worse, you overestimate the quality of the defense (unlike you do for Argentina 2010), and don't look at the importance the offense (specially Ronaldo) played in that WC.
1) That's not entirely true. There was the hope of MESSI taking his NT to the final & and the hope of Argentina turning things around. It almost came true: 2) Messi played behind the strikers but often switched back and forth to his natural habitat (the right side flank). Messi was unlucky to score in the first couple of games and then he simply diminished. He had 3 total assists: 1 was an illegal assist (Tevez was offside, the goal should have never counted) and he hit the post and Palermo was there for the rebound, the other was a legit/direct assist. The best player on earth basically pulled a RONALIDNHO 06, perhaps he was tired, who knows?
1. YUP he did his best for a man who wasn't 100%. A younger RONALDO took his NT to the finals. Did Messi ever do that prior to age 23? NOPE! 2. Again: People had jumped on the Arige bandwagon, everyone expected MESSI to shine. People thought MESSI was going to deliver when it mattered the most! THAT MOMENT NEVER CAME, UNFORTUNATELY! 3. So Messi was the only one playing against Germany? Are you referring to the 2011 PES DEMO? Because Messi's 2010 WC performance vs the Germans was far from impressive. Franz Beckenbauer was a defender (DM/LIBERO) and Cruyff was an attacking player. For instance, one can argue that MALDINI was the best player of the 90's (He was very consistent). However, we all know that: O FENOMENO followed closely by Zidane, Baggio, and Romario get all the votes. Then the thread titles is very misleading. Ronaldo was rehabbing by age 23. How about this for a comparison: Ronaldo 97 vs Messi 2010 O Fenomeno (age 21): 47 goals in 49 games and won 3 Club Titles Copa America Winner & Copa Confederation Cup winner. 15 goals in 20 games for Brazil La Pulga (age 23): 47 goals in 53 games and won 1 club title (la liga) 2 goals in 10 games for Argentina
1) IL WRONGO!!! Bebeto was called after the exclusion of Romario. And the RONALDO-ROMARIO (RO-RO) partnership is the greatest duo since Pele and Garrincha! [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqBUGumYO-Y"]YouTube - Romário e Ronaldo a dupla em 97 em números[/ame] 2) Well Zagallo LEFT OUT Romario and Emerson and Mauro Silva (any of these two could have done a better job than Dunga in 98). Also he decided to leave out: Vampeta! Sure blame it on Diego! I think you can only blame the coach so much. Ronaldinho in 06 was SIMPLY HORRIBLE! Yes, blame Parreira for "playing him" out of position etc. At least you can TRY to make the best out of it, but Dinho failed to do so and so did MESSI.
In 1994 Romario wanted his best friend Edmundo as his strike partner upfront, not Ronaldo. And I never said Romario stats were better than R9 while playing for Brazil. I only mentioned his ego, as in personality. The stats you provide when comparing Brazil 98 vs Argentina 2010 fail to consider the opposition each team faced respectively. Also Brazil's loss to Norway was very suspicious. Denmark gave them some unexpected problems, but they were very dangerous attacking side. Denmark tore Nigeria to shreds in the previous round, and the Africans were very talented team themselves. Brazil's defense handled Holland's offense in the semi-finals quite well, as they struggled to equalize. Ok then, how about Cruyff vs Muller then? Who is accepted as better all-time player and who has a WC title? How about Di Stefano vs Paolo Rossi?
Just a stupid comparison as they are so far apart skillwise and club sucesswise, while it's a close call for Messi/Ronaldo.
Ok, I admit that might've been a little stupid and inappropriate comparison. But I hope at least you understand the point I'm trying to make. There are players who haven't won the WC title but are considered better than others who have won it. On many all-time greatest players' lists I've seen Cruyff and Di Stefano very close behind Pele and Maradona and higher places than many WC winning players. Why is that?
It's the internet. People love to nitpick on active players because the've seen so much of their games - precisely their failures. Long retired legend don't receive the same treatment. Just look at the CR/Messi thread.... I've never seen anyone saying something bad about tons 50s-80s player who will most likely be behind both CR/Messi on an alltimer list when it's all said and done. Give it 30 years then there won't be any Messi critics out there.
I simply put out the fact that Argentina 2010 defense were NOT worse than Brazil98 as some excused for Messi: Argentina 2010 defense fallen out ONLY against Germany team, whereas Brazil98 fallen out at any minutes of games if Ronaldo and his co (Rivaldo bebto) could not turn around! Where the 21yrs old delivered 4goals+3ass/6games to lead Brazil to Final Messi 23yrs old failed to affect major wins for Argentina team to pass just 2nd round Cruijff and Muller were different cases (Muller shone best at WC70 to Euro72, while Cruijff shone his best at WC74. Cruiff at WC74 was great and he represented a "totall footbal" as new trend which impact the whole world, Muller could not do the same. Yes Brazil was favorite because of Ro-Ro partnership (invincible from 97 displayed at copa to confed and friendlies). Here is some link for that: Romario and Ronaldo: Brazil's Thrilling Strikers By CHRISTOPHER CLAREY Published: June 11, 1997 PARIS, June 10 — ''Ronaldo, Romario.'' ''Romario, Ronaldo.'' Either way, it rolls off the tongue, and either way, it has become a mantra from Porto Alegre in the south of Brazil to Rio De Janeiro and Belem further north. Exactly one year before they begin defending their World Cup title in France, the Brazilians again appear to possess the most dangerous striker tandem in international soccer. .....and then the fatal FINAL: Ronaldo Drama Makes 10 Years One of the most controversial games in the history of Brazilian football happened exactly ten years ago... Jul 13, 2008 10:46:03 AM Brazil reached the final of the 1998 World Cup as favourites but were unable to stamp their authority on the game and endured a 3-0 defeat at the hands of the tournament's hosts, France. After the game, it was reported that Ronaldo had suffered a convulsive fit the night before the game but no one can say exactly what happened at the Château de Grande Romaine, where the team guided by Mario Zagallo were staying. Ronaldo was even taken to the hospital and removed from the starting line-up for the final but was later reinstated by the coach. According to Zico, only the doctors could rule him out of the clash. "Moments before a game, a problem like that has an impact on the players," said Zico. "But if the doctor allowed him, who could say no? The situation had an impact on Ronaldo's performance and, of course, on the squad's performance. For everything that the player represented at that time. We all feared for Ronaldo's health." The poor 21yrs old lad was carried the HEAVIEST burden in his life ... delivery the WC (as most 100% Brazilians awaited and almost 80% of worldwide expected)
A bit off topic but .... I believe he was only able to play 2 days after the Denmark game. Even still he wouldn't have been 100%. Cutting him was probably the correct decision.
Did Brazil's defense allowed 4 goals to be scored on them in the same game? Well, Argentina's defense did, so do you think that makes them worst? Would've Brazil and Ronaldo been able to overcome a 4 goal deficit in a game? When comparing Cruyff vs Muller, I'm comparing their overall career, not specific best tournament performance. The German striker has a WC title and an Euro title with the national team, and is also accepted as one of the best goalscorers. Compared to him, Cruyff has nothing with the Dutch team, yet he is considered higher on the all-time list. It doesn't matter why is that, as I fully understand why, but that is my counter-point to your claim that Ronaldo should be considered better than Messi because he has a WC title, which he earned (with actual performances) later than the age of 23. Can R9 match Messi's club achievements? Messi's advantage on club level is at least equal to Ronaldo's better performance in 1998 when Brazil didn't win.
First point, indeed, a Ronaldoless Brazil lost 3goals to France in final. With Ronaldo they won 5/6games played and allowed 7goals. Now, if you took off the Germany game, Argentina 2010 (allowed 2goals/4games) was better than Brazil98 (allowed 6goals/4games) = counter to your claim: Braizil98 more "organized" and "beter" Second bold, NO. I said EVEN W/O WC2002, upto 1999 at same age (23yrs) Ronaldo was already established as among the TOP all time. Messi was NOT yet considered. Sorry, your points are irrelevant with "club achievements" to support Messi (being with Barca a dream team for 5,6years). CLUB achievements were from 20+ players contributions, NOT like Messi "singlehandedly" won for them! According to your point, Xavi Puyol would be even "better' than Messi for they had "more club achievements" than Messi in same team??? RIDICULOUS
Three goals is still less than four goals, is it not? Brazil might've allowed more goals overall, but their game plan still help them progress, did it not? And why take away the Germany game, because it suits you? That Germany game was enough to expose all the weaknesses (lack of organization, lack of balance, very weak defenders all four of which were actually center-backs) in that Argentinean team and their inexperienced coach. Here is how Argentina lined-up: ---------------------------Romero---------------------- -Ottamendi-----Demichelis-----Samuel-------Heinze- --------------------------Mascherano------------------- ----M.Rodrigues---------------------------------Di Maria ------------------------------Messi------------------------- --------------------Tevez-------------Higuain------------- And then this how Brazil lined up in 1998: ------------------------------Taffarel---------------------------- -----------------------Aldair----------Baiano-------------------- --Cafu-------------------------------------------------R.Carlos-- -----------------------Dunga----------Sampaio----------------- ------Leonardo---------------------------------------Rivaldo---- ---------------------Bebeto------------Ronaldo------------------ Now, it's easier to see who was better organized. Someone criticized Sampaio earlier (I'm not sure if it was you), but he scored 3 or 4 goals for Brazil at that WC! By 1999, there is no way Ronaldo was established as an all time great player! You don't like my "club achievements" point because it gives the edge to Messi, and there is nothing you can say to counter that. Therefore you are trying to grasp for straws. So what if Messi is part of a great team like Barca? Who did Ronaldo play for until he was 23? Yes, other players contributed to Barca's success with Messi. But didn't the same thing occurred on teams where Ronaldo played until 23 of age? For example, I vividly remember R9 playing with such players like Figo, Guardiola, Stoichkov, Amor, Blanc and Luis Enrique at Barca - Bergomi, Simeone, Djorkaeff, Zamorano, Winter and Zanetti at Inter. In 1970 WC, Pele played with teammates on one of the best teams of all time. Should we take anything away from him because of that? Same we can say about many other great players. Maradona maybe the only exception in 1986, as apart from Valdano and Burrchaga the rest were pretty average players compared to some other WC winning teams. You are going nowhere with such arguments "Messi plays for great Barca team". According to your point, Fabio Cannavaro is better player than Paolo Maldini. Which of course he isn't!
An interesting piece on Ronaldo, on the eve of the 98' WC final - The Guardian, 11 July 1998: The dazzling meteor who can get lost in space. HE DIDN'T come to France to compete with the players of his generation but to seek a place among the best of the two millennia - this one and the coming one. If Romario, his predecessor, was subtlety, Ronaldo is exuberance. If Romario's habitat was the penalty area, Ronaldo's home would need to measure half the size of the pitch. If Romario is the past, Ronaldo's almost cybernetic play belongs to the future. The first time I saw him I spent the match bemoaning his play in vain: he would shrug his shoulders and set off on the solitary adventure of taking on defenders. Every time he touched the ball he hit it a long way - too far - in front of his feet and I, like every other spectator playing vicariously, always groaned for the same reason: "Ooh! it went too far". It looked like it was going out (ooh!), but he would reach it; it looked like the defender had the advantage (ooh!), but he'd get there; it looked like the keeper's ball (ooh!), but it was a goal. What happened was that I was measuring his speed in human terms and Ronaldo is a physical portent who throws assumptions about time and distance out of the window. He is a marvellous, strange body that hits the ball hard and accurately, heads badly and finds very effective solutions at close quarters.[QQ ] Only inside the area, when space begins to be his enemy, does one discover that his speed is also mental and that he hides a cool skill for finding space for a shot. In reality, Ronaldo plays to shoot and his power is, after all, overwhelming. He searches for the ball, receives it and from that moment his only objective is the opposition goal. It's a case of a soloist who doesn't think about the game, only the goal. He sometimes gives the sensation that he's playing for Nike, not for Brazil. Nobody has his unbalancing capacity, his destabilising power; even when he sets off 50 metres from goal he intimidates as if he were not just a man but a mob. But this obsession with bearing down on goal, whether the conditions exist or not, bothers me. He gives the impression of only playing football if there's no other way through. On the expanse of a ranch he would be uncontainable but in tight spaces there's no time to get up speed (no one is quick inside a lift). In those cases he would do better to control the ball and look for the empty space, because even footballers from another planet have to respect the simple laws of this game. Ronaldo never forms partnerships. The company of another forward seems to interfere with his obligatory slalom; in fact at Barcelona and at Inter he has always played as a lone ranger with the creative support of De la Pena or Djorkaeff. The landscape is always the same: his team-mates find him with the ball and he begins his personal adventure which divorces him from the team. ANYONE who saw Pele lay off 10 balls in succession first time began to doubt whether he was as great he was made out to be, and when the imagination was thinking up such nonsense as "and this is Pele .. ?" he would conjure up a goal out of nothing, drawing on his talent but also using surprise, because having disguised himself as an ordinary player for a few minutes he had managed to lower the opposition's guard. Ronaldo is a boxer who always wants to land the knockout punch. Even if he manages to do so, someone should tell him that this is a bad way of boxing. In France 98 he is the only one with the right to seek a definitive place alongside Maradona, but so far he has not found it. The best player in the world is still playing badly even though he is winning matches for Brazil.
it's interesting comaprison about two most talented and most dominance offensive forces since maradona. i'm a big ronaldo fan but IF messi stay healthy he will be overall better player than ronaldo was. his only 23 and will be improve in next 3 years. a player ability are improve to 26 so he has a time to do it. what more important, he is better and better in every year, more versatile and complete and what is the most important thing, he is 100% focus on football ( = 100% professionalism ), while r9 never was. maybe he woulnd/t have as great nt career as ronaldo did ( as well as cruyff and distefano, zico or platini ), but overall he will be a better player, higher in all time rank. and i can bet that messi will achive great things with his nt. argentine is too long without wc medals and copa titles. it will come with messi, who is someone special. ronaldo has great prime but has no health, zidane has no impressive prime but has longevity at the highest level. leo could have this two things in him. two the most important factors inplayer rating - prime and longevity. for me it's pointless disscusion, who was better; ronaldo 96-98, ronaldinho 04-06 or messi 08-10. maybe r9 was the best, but after his 2 great seasons he never reproduce it , while messi is better than his last two seasons and will be better and better in next years. ronaldo at 23 was better than players like cruyff, distefano, platini or puskas at the same age, but overall..... to sum it up, messi has skills, health and 100% professionalism. he has everything to be one of the best player ever. none of ronaldo, zidane, ronaldinho has it all in one body. you like it him or not you should to pray for messi's health. world is waiting too long for someone who will be worthy to be really compare with the best players ever, not only in prime, not aobut titles and 2-3 big goals but overall. if not him, nobody will do it...
He was cleared by doctors but wasn't fully fit. Meaning that he would have probably missed the group stage.
To start with I do not recall any thing like Ronaldo entering the WC to compete with Pele or Maradona. His assumption or his own opinion should NOT be revealed in newspaper. Luckily he published this piece AFTER the final - if before he would get shot. What;s his point of the last bold? He IMPOSED too much of his own taste to judge a player - I am sure Ronaldinho played much more fancy and beautiful than Ronaldo and so what? Who won more for Brazil? this guy DID NOT know what he was talking about. Roanldo was among the very RARE players (legends) who does NOT need space, as he could shrugged off his marker or walk thru 2, 3 players (in best form)
Here's another great article: http://www.fifa.com/classicfootball/awards/gala/news/newsid=71877.html RONALDO & MESSI vs PELE & MARADONA?
Very good post, good job! I see your point and I agree in general. Notice how the article says who "the four footballing Gods" are - Pele, Mardona, Di Stefano and Cruyff. Only two of them have won the WC title, and only one of them has won it more than once. But all four are considered as "the footballing Gods". Ronaldo vs Messi = Pele vs Maradona? That might be correct to say. At the end of the day, I'm enjoying watching Messi play. He is fantastic player and has done well so far. I agree that the next step in his road to greatness is to win the WC. But if he doesn't for some reason, depending on how better he can do for Barca, he could still end up reaching all-time greatness just like Di Stefano and Cruyff have. For some reason, I didn't enjoy watching Ronaldo play even in his best form. I just wasn't a fan of him. I liked Romario, Rivaldo, Del Piero, Stoichkov, R.Baggio in 90s.
First bold, because Brazil98 had a RONALDO (who eventually won the Goldenball as best player of that WC) Second bold, only for your info: even though Ronaldo did NOT YET win WC2002 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Soccer_(magazine)#The_Greatest_Players_of_the_20th_Century World Soccer (magazine) The Greatest Players of the 20th Century (Published December 1999)[6] 1 Brazil Pelé 2 Argentina Diego Maradona 3 Netherlands Johan Cruijff 4 Germany Franz Beckenbauer 5 France Michel Platini 6 ArgentinaSpain Alfredo di Stéfano 7 HungarySpain Ferenc Puskás 8 Northern Ireland George Best 9 Netherlands Marco van Basten 10 Portugal Eusébio 11 Soviet Union Lev Yashin 12 England Bobby Charlton 13 Brazil Ronaldo 14 England Bobby Moore 15 Germany Gerd Muller 16 Italy Roberto Baggio 17 England Stanley Matthews 18 Brazil Zico 19 Italy Franco Baresi 20 Brazil Garrincha Third bold: NO. it's NOT about what I like or you like. But your point is just so irrelevant in judging player performance and talents (like this post thread: compare Messi vs Ronaldo at 23)! For example, now if we compare Messi (now) to Maradona at 1986. So according to "your point" (of "club achievement") then Messi (4 LIGAS + 2UCL) would be judged as a "better player" (Maradona only 1 liga)? Totally irrelevant !!! Last bold, that is "your mistaken point" , not mine! If you followed my post, I have always said Canavaro was the "worst ever" ballon D'or winner and very controversial case that year 2006! While Ronaldo ruled as best player in WC98 with clear better performance, Canavaro was just a very good defender and happened to be "CAPTAIN" of the WC winner in which almost every Italian players contributed to that cup (Totti, Delpoero, Zambrotta, Grosso , Buffon, Pirlo and Gatusso all got points scoring or assist)- totally different story.
Ok, so in this list from 1999, Ronaldo was ahead of players like Muller, Moore and Garrincha? Based on what? WC achievements, club performances or talent and abilities? Is WC performances alone justified enough to judge players when comparing them to one another? Also, isn't it possible that Brazil were able to overcome opponents thanks to Ronaldo, whose performances were helped by the organization of the team by their experienced Zagallo? You can't deny the fact that this Brazilian team was build/assembled to get the best out of him. I don't think the same can be said about Argentina's team in 2010, as it wasn't build to get the best out of Messi. If it was build/assembled to get the best out of him, then he should've been partnering Higuain as a second forward and we should've seen Cambiaso and Zanetti not only on the roster but also in the starting XI. p.s. I just followed you and responded to all you post in 3 different threads.
I only provided info for what I said and I never said I fully agree with that list - for example Garrincha (not well known/seen outside Brazil except WC58 and 52) was placed too low while G.Best was too high Hmm Brazil98 was not the same team that won Copa and confed97 (Romario injured, Denilson not used properly, Juninho injured, and Bebeto was abit rusty with age... and Rivaldo was new member ) so NO that team was not a good team built up for Ronaldo. In contrast, that team relied too much on Ronaldo (skills) in attack especially without his greatest parner of Romario! In 2002, Scolari did build a very good and ballanced team to serve Ronaldo (that I agree) and he did deliver better with 8goals scored including 2 man of match semi and final (despite of he was no longer at his best like 98)
That list was voted by clueless idiots. No doubt Messi ends up in the Top 20 if World Soccer would redo a vote right now.