There is quite a debate going on about the Ronaldo and messi's position in history of football. Are they equal to Pele and maradona?
They are equal to Pele and Maradona at their worst imo. When they retire those two will be the new "Pele and Maradona".
People has this romantic nostalgia about the past that every thing looks, sounds and tastes better in 'good old days. Here are the few things romantics miss out.
Physical conditions of the players were awful. Teams had many fat unfit old players that cannot run 40 yards without stopping to take a breather. there were hardly any pressing at all and games were mostly played at the walking pace after 60mins. Most teams are tactically borderline naive and their defending as a team is worse than most pub teams.
Messi and ronaldo may not have to face two footed challenges but Pele and Maradona never had to deal with the pressing, team defense and tactical scrutiny that Messi and ronaldo are constantly subjected to.
Pele and Maradona are both excellent players but Messi and ronaldo are better
Messi and Ronaldo new 'Pele and Maradona'
posted on 21/11/13
Darren The King Fletcher
Apparently you need to look up the meaning of lottery too
posted on 21/11/13
Darren
To be honest, Messi doesn't even have to win the World Cup. But he (and Ronaldo) need to do it at a World Cup to really show how great they are.
And when I say 'do it' I mean doing something at all! In 2010 Messi did nothing. I don't even think he scored a goal and was woeful against Germany.
Obviously anyone can have a bad World Cup but Messi really needs to have a decent one next year before he really can be called the greatest of all time.
posted on 21/11/13
Fair play.
posted on 21/11/13
comment by Screen (U8522)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Robb : Goodbye Kenny Powers. (U9808)
posted 1 minute ago
Winning the world cup is a bit like winning the CL. Its a bit of a lottery
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you need to look up the meaning of what a lottery is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Robb
you conveniently avoid the question
If Maradona did not play in the 1986 final and did not win the world cup in 1986, does that mean he is not one of the all time greats
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't understand your question though. He was fit and they did win the World Cup. And he was fit and took a good but not great side to the following World Cup final.
And in between those World Cups he went to Napoli, and helped them win 2 scudettos.
posted on 21/11/13
Screen
If we're playing the 'if' game I could ask you IF the Brazilian Ronaldo not ever gotten seriously injured would he have won countless CL titles?
posted on 21/11/13
Robb
You are ready to disregard all the achievements for club by messi and ronaldo and not recognize them as one of the all time greats because they havent won the world cup.
so If Maradona did not play in the 1986 final and did not win the world cup then he too is not an all time great according to your logic.
win the world cup final = All time great
not win the world cup final = not all time great
one match makes the difference. bit unfair isnt it?
posted on 21/11/13
Screen, I don't know if you're willfully ignoring the above points but it's not even about winning the world cup. It's about doing something at all at a World Cup which Messi and Ronaldo are both yet to do.
Maradona has plenty of plaudits at club level but he also did it at multiple world cups.
I have nothing against Ronaldo and Messi but i'm sure we can all agree that they both have time to have increase the effectiveness of their international careers on the biggest stage.
That's the problem with this debate. Ronaldo and Messi's careers are still ongoing. They could both storm the next two World Cups and no-one would ever debate it again and everyone on here would say they're the best ever (or even just one of them).
But in 4/5 years if neither of them have ever had a meaningful impact at a World Cup it would be safe to say they may not be the greatest ever.
posted on 21/11/13
Robb
fair enough
Its a fair argument on "meaning full impact on the world cup" than winning the world cup
ronaldo actually did have a meaningful impact on the world cup, he was the best player for Portugal in 2006 when they got to semis. Portugal wont even be in this world cup if it wasnt for him.
there is still question marks over messi though. Messi did failed in last world cup but he has time to play atleast two more world cups. Its inevitable He will score three or four in one of those. we will have to wait and see.
Atleast that is much better argument than completely disregarding them because they dont play with a heavier ball on a chitty pitch
posted on 21/11/13
I'm open minded enough to accept that one day either Messi or Ronaldo could be the best ever. But they still have some things to accomplish.
posted on 21/11/13
Winning the world cup is a bit like winning the CL.
**
the best team usually wins the WC