Why I think Cristiano Ronaldo is the most overrated player in recent times.
Scroll to see replies
I've never read such BS in my life before just trash.
I do not understand your criticisms of Ronaldo regarding his machine like capability of scoring goals...
Passing/dribbling are rudimentary skills which are solely the means to an end, the end being a goal. Real Madrid operate around Ronaldo because he's there main goal-scorer. Scoring goals wins you games, winning games accumulates points and advances you in tournaments.
Passing/dribbling are rudimentary skills which are solely the means to an end, the end being a goal. Real Madrid operate around Ronaldo because he's there main goal-scorer. Scoring goals wins you games, winning games accumulates points and advances you in tournaments.
Football is not 'about more than goals'. It is a game designed for one team to try and score more goals than the other. The key differentiating variable, therefore, is who scores the most goals. That is why goalscorers are the most valuable players on the pitch, and that is why it is preposterous to say that someone is 'just a goalscorer'.
To illustrate, let us take two hugely unlikely but illuminating scenarios A team could complete 100% of their passes across an entire match, win every single tackle and aerial duel, and exhibit some outstanding footballing pyrotechnics. However, this team lack a goalscorer, and therefore do not win the game. Team B, conversely, may have a player who scores 100% of his shots, but this player has something like a ten percent pass completion ratio, gets booked for a bad tackle, and doesn't track back once. This player gets one shot in the match, scores, and the difference is made. I've deliberately chosen obviously ridiculous situations, but you understand my point.
It is of utterly no consequence that Ronaldo doesn't have 'defensive abilities'. He is an out-and-out attacking player, and his job is to put the ball into the back of the net. I do agree that there is a substantial element of aesthetics to football, and players like Ronaldinho come close to amalgamating the aesthetic and the effective, but, at the end of the day, the effective will always take precedence. Nor is it of especial consequence that he stifles Higuain's game, in the same way that, whilst it may be true that Barcelona's defeat of Mallorca suggests that Messi stifles Sanchez and Fabregas, it doesn't matter. A side wants to win, and their best chance of winning is to promote the talents of their best player. I know the idea of a team in which every attacking player gets an equal chance of contributing to the goal tally sounds very nice, but sport doesn't work like that. A side isolates their strong points, and endeavours to emphasise them. Why would Ronaldo - or Messi, for that matter - bother doing defensive work when they are so effective at scoring goals? If tracking back means they are less likely to be in the positions to score crucial goals, it is nonsensical to expect them to do so.
Similarly, it has become somewhat conventional to criticise Messi's 'workrate' (and Ronaldo's, too). It is arguably because Messi runs three or four miles a game (as opposed to the normal six or seven) that he can play almost every game in a season, and make such decisive contributions to every one.
I would also argue that your appeal to an ability to 'take a game by the scruff of its neck' is typical banal nonsense, the type peddled by myopic pundits and pub debaters. If it can be concluded - as it surely can - that the key differential in a match is the goal, then scoring a goal is the most decisive contribution a player can make. Thus, the more prolific and clinical a player, the better he is at deciding games. In England, the ideal performance is the Gerrard v AC Milan performance - running everywhere, tackling, scoring a goal, and suchlike. He turned that game around, yes. But could you honestly say that Ronaldo's goal in the Copa Del Rey final wasn't the decisive contribution? Or that Michael Owen's two finishes in the 2001 FA Cup final weren't the key moments? Or that Lampard's decisive contributions in the 2004/2005 season, regardless of his assists and passing, were the two goals at the Reebok stadium?
If one rates a footballer based on their ability to contribute to matches at the highest level, then it is ludicrous to call Ronaldo overrated. This premise holds if we look at Ronaldo in comparison to past 'greats' - Ronaldo has made just as many decisive contributions to big games as many of the names typically cited.
To illustrate, let us take two hugely unlikely but illuminating scenarios A team could complete 100% of their passes across an entire match, win every single tackle and aerial duel, and exhibit some outstanding footballing pyrotechnics. However, this team lack a goalscorer, and therefore do not win the game. Team B, conversely, may have a player who scores 100% of his shots, but this player has something like a ten percent pass completion ratio, gets booked for a bad tackle, and doesn't track back once. This player gets one shot in the match, scores, and the difference is made. I've deliberately chosen obviously ridiculous situations, but you understand my point.
It is of utterly no consequence that Ronaldo doesn't have 'defensive abilities'. He is an out-and-out attacking player, and his job is to put the ball into the back of the net. I do agree that there is a substantial element of aesthetics to football, and players like Ronaldinho come close to amalgamating the aesthetic and the effective, but, at the end of the day, the effective will always take precedence. Nor is it of especial consequence that he stifles Higuain's game, in the same way that, whilst it may be true that Barcelona's defeat of Mallorca suggests that Messi stifles Sanchez and Fabregas, it doesn't matter. A side wants to win, and their best chance of winning is to promote the talents of their best player. I know the idea of a team in which every attacking player gets an equal chance of contributing to the goal tally sounds very nice, but sport doesn't work like that. A side isolates their strong points, and endeavours to emphasise them. Why would Ronaldo - or Messi, for that matter - bother doing defensive work when they are so effective at scoring goals? If tracking back means they are less likely to be in the positions to score crucial goals, it is nonsensical to expect them to do so.
Similarly, it has become somewhat conventional to criticise Messi's 'workrate' (and Ronaldo's, too). It is arguably because Messi runs three or four miles a game (as opposed to the normal six or seven) that he can play almost every game in a season, and make such decisive contributions to every one.
I would also argue that your appeal to an ability to 'take a game by the scruff of its neck' is typical banal nonsense, the type peddled by myopic pundits and pub debaters. If it can be concluded - as it surely can - that the key differential in a match is the goal, then scoring a goal is the most decisive contribution a player can make. Thus, the more prolific and clinical a player, the better he is at deciding games. In England, the ideal performance is the Gerrard v AC Milan performance - running everywhere, tackling, scoring a goal, and suchlike. He turned that game around, yes. But could you honestly say that Ronaldo's goal in the Copa Del Rey final wasn't the decisive contribution? Or that Michael Owen's two finishes in the 2001 FA Cup final weren't the key moments? Or that Lampard's decisive contributions in the 2004/2005 season, regardless of his assists and passing, were the two goals at the Reebok stadium?
If one rates a footballer based on their ability to contribute to matches at the highest level, then it is ludicrous to call Ronaldo overrated. This premise holds if we look at Ronaldo in comparison to past 'greats' - Ronaldo has made just as many decisive contributions to big games as many of the names typically cited.
Original post by trrr
.
.
Couldn't agree more on what you said about Zidane and Scholes. Yes nostalgia plays a part but you only have to look at what Scholes' peers said about him to know how insanely talented he was. As for Zidane, he will always be my footballing idol. Few players are as complete as Zizou: his touch, leadership, flair, heading ability (wahay!), aggression and brilliant striking of the ball made him a titanic opponent.
Original post by Kruz
I've never read such BS in my life before just trash.
Instead of trashing my opinion you could write something constructive.
Original post by trrr
Instead of trashing my opinion you could write something constructive.
Is the first page of constructive arguments not enough for you to realise how unlogical your opinion is?
Original post by pinda.college
Is the first page of constructive arguments not enough for you to realise how unlogical your opinion is?
You mean illogical, and ive read all the arguments but it wont change my mind.
Original post by trrr
You mean illogical, and ive read all the arguments but it wont change my mind.
So why ask for more responses?
Original post by trrr
Instead of trashing my opinion you could write something constructive.
Goals win games.
Defenses are good, they'll help you to not lose, but they can't win you anything. You could have the best defensive line up in history and a goal that was impregnable, but unless you've got someone to score at least 1 goal up front, the best you'll ever do is draw.
"Football fans are suckers for goalscorers" ... because that's how you win. Name any successful side in the history of football, whether club or national team, and they will all have one thing in common - someone who can score goals.
You say he's overrated and that maybe so, but to negate him because "all he does is score goals" is childish at best.
How can some argue football is not about goals :/
You can play the most beautiful football in the world but if you do not score goals you do not win anything. This is the reason strikers seem to get all the plaudits rather than defender. If Messi scores a hat-trick every newspaper will just state that rather than how well Pique/Puyol defended. Same with Ronaldo, RVP, Falcao etc.
You can play the most beautiful football in the world but if you do not score goals you do not win anything. This is the reason strikers seem to get all the plaudits rather than defender. If Messi scores a hat-trick every newspaper will just state that rather than how well Pique/Puyol defended. Same with Ronaldo, RVP, Falcao etc.
Original post by trrr
You mean illogical, and ive read all the arguments but it wont change my mind.
Well, then, your post is essentially purposeless if it will not cause you to change your mind. There is something incredibly frustrating about the poster who asks for opinions, receives logical replies, and remains intransigent.
Original post by Economi
141 goals in 130 games.
That just shows he's a good player, nothing to do with being over or under rated, the term 'over rated' is absolutely useless and does nothing to create any discussion, I could quite fairly claim messi to be overrated because I don't think he's at the same level as Pele or Maradona, doesn't mean I don't thiknk he's the best player in the world by far.
The terms don't reflect quality whatsoever, only the quality relative to the general consensus of a players quality.
For me, cristiano is overrated because theres still far too many people debating him to be as good as messi when for me, he is far behind.
Original post by pinda.college
I do not understand your criticisms of Ronaldo regarding his machine like capability of scoring goals...
Passing/dribbling are rudimentary skills which are solely the means to an end, the end being a goal. Real Madrid operate around Ronaldo because he's there main goal-scorer. Scoring goals wins you games, winning games accumulates points and advances you in tournaments.
Passing/dribbling are rudimentary skills which are solely the means to an end, the end being a goal. Real Madrid operate around Ronaldo because he's there main goal-scorer. Scoring goals wins you games, winning games accumulates points and advances you in tournaments.
Hmm. I'm not sure I agree with the bolded part. I agree with the general premise of what you say, but it cannot be denied that being able to pass like Iniesta or Zidane makes someone a better footballer than, say, Ramires. Similarly, one could argue that the fundamental part of goalscoring - shooting - is a rudimentary skill, too. This may sounds like caviling, and probably is, but it was just something that occurred to me.
Original post by trrr
Football fans are suckers for goalscorers and overrate them without ever fully considering other sides of their game. In fact I still believe till this day that Theirry Henry in his prime was better than Cristiano Ronaldo and here are a few points I would like to make.
1) He is an incredibly selfish player, he is not a great assister like Henry is and negates the goal scoring potential of Gonzalo Higuain. The might not be his fault as Mourinho has based the team around Ronaldo and he has given him the freedom to move around the pitch. He is also Madrids main free kick taker and penalty taker and his importance to the Real team also contributes to his greediness. Statistically he has taken more shots than any other player in La liga and this explains why he scores so many goals, couple that with the fact that Madrid much like Barcelona dominate their games pretty much more than any other team in Europe and have the best squad in world football.
2) Does Ronaldo do that much beside score goals? When has he ever been the driving force behind the teams like Theirry Henry or taken games by the scruff the neck? I had the previlege of seeing Henry doing this on countless occasions against Inter Milan, Real Madrid, Liverpool etc Sure he is a big game player and scores goals at the right time but football is more than just a game about goals. When I say football is more than just about goals im going by the notion that midfields win you games and defences win you titles. Im not actually denying the fact that it is the most important aspect of the game, but that it requires organisation and an creative involvement. Ive been thinking and perhaps Ronaldo does not have to be involved- he has only one specific job and that is too score goals. However in my opinion your footballing abilities should not be judged on one particular side of your game, it should be judged on all sides. For that reason I wouldnt swap Zidane for even the likes of a Lionel Messi or Ronaldo. When I use the term scruff of the neck im talking about how just one persons involvement contributes to the flow of the game e.g. Paul Scholes played a massive role in negating the influence of Dembele earlier on in the season in Uniteds 3 2 loss to Tottenham. He conducted that game and created a situation where Spurs would have to hang on for dear life in the final 20 or so minutes.
3) He is nowhere near the greatest player of all time- The fact is football has lost its true superstars. The likes of Maldini, Zidane, Cafu, Ronaldo Nazario de Lima and Ronaldinho will never be seen again.
By the looks of it I guess we all different, I didnt really write to get negs
I wanted to make more points but Im short on time, however I would like to see some opinions.
1) He is an incredibly selfish player, he is not a great assister like Henry is and negates the goal scoring potential of Gonzalo Higuain. The might not be his fault as Mourinho has based the team around Ronaldo and he has given him the freedom to move around the pitch. He is also Madrids main free kick taker and penalty taker and his importance to the Real team also contributes to his greediness. Statistically he has taken more shots than any other player in La liga and this explains why he scores so many goals, couple that with the fact that Madrid much like Barcelona dominate their games pretty much more than any other team in Europe and have the best squad in world football.
2) Does Ronaldo do that much beside score goals? When has he ever been the driving force behind the teams like Theirry Henry or taken games by the scruff the neck? I had the previlege of seeing Henry doing this on countless occasions against Inter Milan, Real Madrid, Liverpool etc Sure he is a big game player and scores goals at the right time but football is more than just a game about goals. When I say football is more than just about goals im going by the notion that midfields win you games and defences win you titles. Im not actually denying the fact that it is the most important aspect of the game, but that it requires organisation and an creative involvement. Ive been thinking and perhaps Ronaldo does not have to be involved- he has only one specific job and that is too score goals. However in my opinion your footballing abilities should not be judged on one particular side of your game, it should be judged on all sides. For that reason I wouldnt swap Zidane for even the likes of a Lionel Messi or Ronaldo. When I use the term scruff of the neck im talking about how just one persons involvement contributes to the flow of the game e.g. Paul Scholes played a massive role in negating the influence of Dembele earlier on in the season in Uniteds 3 2 loss to Tottenham. He conducted that game and created a situation where Spurs would have to hang on for dear life in the final 20 or so minutes.
3) He is nowhere near the greatest player of all time- The fact is football has lost its true superstars. The likes of Maldini, Zidane, Cafu, Ronaldo Nazario de Lima and Ronaldinho will never be seen again.
By the looks of it I guess we all different, I didnt really write to get negs
I wanted to make more points but Im short on time, however I would like to see some opinions.
1) Ronaldo has recorded more efforts on goal than any other player in La Liga because he is the attacking focus of the Real Madrid team, and he is good enough on the ball to carve out chances by himself. He has however shown on plenty of occasions that he is very capable of providing assists, and while he does seem to prefer to try and create opportunities for himself he is great at drawing two or three defenders onto him before laying it off to somebody in the space that he has created.
2) "defences win you titles". No, winning games wins you titles, it doesn't matter if you win most of your games 1-0 because of your great defence, of whether you score multiple goals each game but have a weak defence. The team that wins the most games wins the title, plain and simple. Ronaldo is the kind of player that can dominate a teams defence and his goal scoring ability can easily win the team games even if their defence has a poor day. As for saying that players have to be judged on their overall usefulness, rubbish. Let's look at the list of greatest players you posted. Could Maldini or Cafu provide a goalscoring threat? How about Zidane, Ronaldo and Ronaldinho defensively? You can't judge a player on their ability across the board, because each player has their own position which requires different skills. You wouldn't say a defender is bad because he doesn't score goals, just like you wouldn't say a striker is bad because he doesn't make defensive tackles. Cristiano Ronaldo is an attacking winger, he is expected to beat players, create chances for himself and the team, and score goals, and in each of those areas he is outstanding.
Original post by KingMessi
Well, then, your post is essentially purposeless if it will not cause you to change your mind. There is something incredibly frustrating about the poster who asks for opinions, receives logical replies, and remains intransigent.
I enjoyed reading your comment and I did agree with some points you made. Im just not quite convinced yet as to why one can say he has surpassed the likes of Zidane. In that way I feel that he is overrated, but when he is compared to todays generation of footballers then yes I agree that he is ahead of most players out there.
Strength, speed, finesse and composure. An all round player, and when you say he does not have a lot of assists, the fact of the matter is he has the quality to take on the chance himself and score.
Scruff of the neck? Who turned up in the CL final against Chelsea...Ronaldo. Who scored a double against Bayern last year? Who's permanently on the score sheet for Real? He's a man for the big games.
Ronaldo is a perfect specimen of a footballer: double footed, skilful, long shot specialist, clinical finisher, aerial threat, pacey. I don't think he's over rated one bit.
I still think Messi is better though. Messi is just magic.
Scruff of the neck? Who turned up in the CL final against Chelsea...Ronaldo. Who scored a double against Bayern last year? Who's permanently on the score sheet for Real? He's a man for the big games.
Ronaldo is a perfect specimen of a footballer: double footed, skilful, long shot specialist, clinical finisher, aerial threat, pacey. I don't think he's over rated one bit.
I still think Messi is better though. Messi is just magic.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Zidane vs. Maradonna
- Is Messi now the undisputed greatest of all time?
- A to Z of Footballers surnames
- Haaland - overrated?
- The Manchester United Thread XXIII
- Should most free kicks be defended without a wall?
- The 2021-2022 epl season banter(with niz)
- What is Your Favorite Football Club
- The First Thing That Comes To Your Mind (Game)
- Which former players would excel in today's game?
- Tottenham Hotspur Society II
- 26yo married Londoner, TSR changed my life AMA
- The Arsenal Thread XXVI
- Will Everton get relegated in 2022/23?
- The Arsenal Thread XXV
- Miscellaneous Thread VII
- Time for Erik Ten Hag to be sacked?
- Chelsea F.C. Thread IX
- BTS are overrated !!!
- What's the most overrated Christmas song?
