IMO, he should have stayed longer at Barca or left Holland earlier. Maybe if he was 100 per cent fit at Italia 90 or picked for the 1998 World Cup, he could have had a greater reputation. He is still a great striker but he isn't the greatest.
in 98 romario was picked but he had a injury in preparation of cup. in 90 he was with an injury too. my argument is if you can pick albania (a team that never play a world cup) i can pick venezuela. is i think venezuela and albania aren't good parameters to compare how good a striker is, by the way score 4 goals in a away game against a bad team is most difficult tha sconre 4 in home game, this was that i say. off course not, but he play against top players in the world here too, gamarra, amaral, sorin, juninho, denilson, ronaldinho, bebeto, and many others play against him, here in brazil league in 90's.
In the modern game, with all the defensive disipline and speed/fitness of every player, i would take Henry over either of these two tubby midgets.
No Ronaldo is the best striker ever, the difference between him and the others and that he could play alone. Puskas Who? you can not compare the 50's with today's football. 1)Ronaldo 2)Van basten 3)??
Romario had stated when he was ready to leave Barca: 1- He dislike the negative football in SerieA (more counter and too much marking) 2- He took the opportunity to go back to Brazil to MAKE 1000goals (like Pele) - He DID it (not quite in official number but good enough record to be proud of)