Atletico Madrid vs Juventus, Rd of 16 1st Leg, VM Sport Extra 1 & BT Sport 3, 8pm

NIMAN

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Imagine someone never watched a game of football, and you told them to watch out for this lad Ronaldo who one of the best ever, he'd walk away saying are ye having a laugh. Always so reliant on others to tee him up for a tap in. Contrast it to the work and creativity guys like Dybala and Griezmann show in these tight games to open up space, set the tempo and get attacks flowing. Ronaldo has always lacked this.

Nonsense to Base opinion of a player on one game in the twilight of his career.

The Golden Miller

NIMAN wrote: »

Nonsense to Base opinion of a player on one game in the twilight of his career.

I've always criticised him for lacking in those attributes

sacamano

No idea why people are biting at those posts.

The Golden Miller

sacamano wrote: »

No idea why people are biting at those posts.

Because they are genuine opinions. Just because the opinion isn't "isn't Ronaldo one of the two best players ever", doesn't automatically mean the person is wumming

Vincent Vega

fullstop wrote: »

Probably sounded better in your own head...

Will sound even better if it holds true come three weeks time.

Then again, Ronaldo is a big game player so they say, so might regret that one. :rolleyes:

The Golden Miller

NIMAN wrote: »

To be fair to Ronnie, it's hard when you are a forward in a negative team.

Juve need to change their style. This negative football doesn't win cl any more. All the best teams attack.

Goes to show how brilliant Griezmann really is. Game after game, season after season, operating in those restraint conditions. Always puts in a shift, and blends it with moments of mercurial genius to lead from the front. Great playmaker and goal scorer, who has never had the luxury of standing around padding stats

Liam O

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Goes to show how brilliant Griezmann really is. Game after game, season after season, operating in those restraint conditions. Always puts in a shift, and blends it with moments of mercurial genius to lead from the front. Great playmaker and goal scorer, who has never had the luxury of standing around padding stats

Ronaldo certainly padded a charity account or 2 in seasons gone by with your money.

sReq | uTeK

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Because they are genuine opinions. Just because the opinion isn't "isn't Ronaldo one of the two best players ever", doesn't automatically mean the person is wumming

Year after year you scribble down the same rhetoric and year after year Ronaldo has obliterated teams, but hey why pass up facts and statistics over a 15 year period when you can **** all over a players career after one bad game, where not only Ronaldo but the pre season champions league favourites were terrible

The Golden Miller

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

Year after year you scribble down the same rhetoric and year after year Ronaldo has obliterated teams, but hey why pass up facts and statistics over a 15 year period when you can **** all over a players career after one bad game, where not only Ronaldo but the pre season champions league favourites were terrible

I'm not saying Ronaldo isn't a great player or a world class striker, I simply point out limitations in his game that others don't want to accept, which then gets confounded with me saying he's a rubbish player.

Many of the attributes the greats have shown down through the years besides goal scoring, Ronaldo has simply lacked. That simple

sReq | uTeK

The Golden Miller wrote: »

I'm not saying Ronaldo isn't a great player or a world class striker, I simply point out limitations in his game that others don't want to accept, which then gets confounded with me saying he's a rubbish player.

Many of the attributes the greats have shown down through the years besides goal scoring, Ronaldo has simply lacked. That simple

Thankfully, history doesn't agree with you nor many of his peers. Anyway, not going round the merry go round with you as it's the exact type of engagement you're looking for.

The Talking Bread

The Golden Miller wrote: »

I'm not saying Ronaldo isn't a great player or a world class striker, I simply point out limitations in his game that others don't want to accept, which then gets confounded with me saying he's a rubbish player.

Many of the attributes the greats have shown down through the years besides goal scoring, Ronaldo has simply lacked. That simple

Most of his most ardent of fans acknowledge the certain weaknesses in his game, your problem is you define in him by same weaknesses and allude to them over and over again and to comical exaggerated extent desperate to push your point across. It is strange hobby just to focus on the slight discrepancies in his game, especially as he has aged and refuse to enjoy a talent that is universally recognised as one of the best players in the game.

Every f*cking year. And then you go into your cave once he does prove you wrong on certain points.

The Golden Miller

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

Thankfully, history doesn't agree with you nor many of his peers. Anyway, not going round the merry go round with you as it's the exact type of engagement you're looking for.

Well tonight's game, plus every game against Atletico between 2013-16 does agree with me in terms of the shortcomings in many aspects of his game. For example playmaking, getting on the ball and influencing the tempo and players around them, aspects all the other greats generally excelled in. For as many games as Ronaldo "does it" (being supplied a tap in), there's an equal amount where he completely flops when it counts

The Golden Miller

The Talking Bread wrote: »

Most of his most ardent of fans acknowledge the certain weaknesses in his game, your problem is you define in him by same weaknesses and allude to them over and over again and to comical exaggerated extent desperate to push your point across. It is strange hobby just to focus on the slight discrepancies in his game, especially as he has aged and refuse to enjoy a talent that is universally recognised as one of the best players in the game.

Every f*cking year. And then you go into your cave once he does prove you wrong on certain points.

They're not just "certain weaknesses" or "slight discrepancies", they are limitations which are prevalent in most games for the duration of 90 minutes. Like there are certain universal metrics in why we regard the greats of the game as greats, and Ronaldo falls short in most of these category's I would say. That's why Ronaldo's greatness is viewed solely under the microscope of goal stats alone, many want give him a pass in most other shortcomings of his game, which were once again blatantly obvious tonight.

Spideog Rua

The Golden Miller wrote: »

They're not just "certain weaknesses" or "slight discrepancies", they are limitations which are prevalent in most games for the duration of 90 minutes. Like there are certain universal metrics in why we regard the greats of the game as greats, and Ronaldo falls short in most of these category's I would say. That's why Ronaldo's greatness is viewed solely under the microscope of goal stats alone, many want give him a pass in most other shortcomings of his game, which were once again blatantly obvious tonight.

Lol

sReq | uTeK

The Golden Miller wrote: »

They're not just "certain weaknesses" or "slight discrepancies", they are limitations which are prevalent in most games for the duration of 90 minutes. Like there are certain universal metrics in why we regard the greats of the game as greats, and Ronaldo falls short in most of these category's I would say. That's why Ronaldo's greatness is viewed solely under the microscope of goal stats alone, many want give him a pass in most other shortcomings of his game, which were once again blatantly obvious tonight.

You keep referring to "we" as if you're on a panel of sorts that has drawn up a series of critera that constitutes what is 'great'. And keep on glossing over the fact that history, his peers, and the accolades hes achieved throughout his career contradict everything you say. Not to mention they come from a credibility far greater than an internet forum called boards.ie

The Golden Miller

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

You keep referring to "we" as if you're on a panel of sorts that has drawn up a series of critera that constitutes what is 'great'. And keep on glossing over the fact that history, his peers, and the accolades hes achieved throughout his career contradict everything you say. Not to mention they come from a credibility far greater than an internet forum called boards.ie

Why are Maradona, Pele, Cruyff regarded as greats? Do we ever mention goal stats? What about guys like Kaka, Hagi etc?

What about other strikers? The Brazilian Ronaldo. Do we mention goals stats when we talk about his greatness, or his all round complete game?

How about even more recently, strikers like Suarez and Griezmann etc? Do we ever mention their goal stats and define their ability on that alone? Remember Suarez at Liverpool, how he could drop deep and set the tempo, link up play and lead from the front. The focal point where his vision and creativity allowed others space and time to play off him.

Or Griezmann. Even with quite performance by his own standards today, where neither him or Ronaldo scored, he was head and shoulders above Ronaldo in ability outfield. Dropping deep and led from the front, playmaking everytime he touched the ball.

And Ronaldo's greatness? Defined exclusively by reeling off goal stats it seems. No one ever wants to talk about the paltry showings in other aspects of his game, criteria we generally use to define greatness when talking about the greats. Unless you could elaborate here in your own words?

Vincent Vega

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Why are Maradona, Pele, Cruyff regarded as greats? Do we ever mention goal stats? What about guys like Kaka, Hagi etc?

What about other strikers? The Brazilian Ronaldo. Do we mention goals stats when we talk about his greatness, or his all round complete game?

How about even more recently, strikers like Suarez and Griezmann etc? Do we ever mention their goal stats and define their ability on that alone? Remember Suarez at Liverpool, how he could drop deep and set the tempo, link up play and lead from the front. The focal point where his vision and creativity allowed others space and time to play off him.

Or Griezmann. Even with quite performance by his own standards today, where neither him or Ronaldo scored, he was head and shoulders above Ronaldo in ability outfield. Dropping deep and led from the front, playmaking everytime he touched the ball.

And Ronaldo's greatness? Defined exclusively by reeling off goal stats it seems. No one ever wants to talk about the paltry showings in other aspects of his game, criteria we generally use to define greatness when talking about the greats. Unless you could elaborate here in your own words?

Yeah well, that's all fine and well, but have they won, as he so humbly reminded the Madrid press post match, 5, I repeat FIVEChampions League titles all by themselves?

Didn't think so.
https://twitter.com/partidazocope/status/1098364590927302656

charolais0153

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Why are Maradona, Pele, Cruyff regarded as greats? Do we ever mention goal stats? What about guys like Kaka, Hagi etc?

What about other strikers? The Brazilian Ronaldo. Do we mention goals stats when we talk about his greatness, or his all round complete game?

How about even more recently, strikers like Suarez and Griezmann etc? Do we ever mention their goal stats and define their ability on that alone? Remember Suarez at Liverpool, how he could drop deep and set the tempo, link up play and lead from the front. The focal point where his vision and creativity allowed others space and time to play off him.

Or Griezmann. Even with quite performance by his own standards today, where neither him or Ronaldo scored, he was head and shoulders above Ronaldo in ability outfield. Dropping deep and led from the front, playmaking everytime he touched the ball.

And Ronaldo's greatness? Defined exclusively by reeling off goal stats it seems. No one ever wants to talk about the paltry showings in other aspects of his game, criteria we generally use to define greatness when talking about the greats. Unless you could elaborate here in your own words?

**** off about ronaldo and his goals. Xavi is a great player that never scored,for the very same reason ronaldo is a great. 700 odd goals in a career is quite staggering,dont you think?

Suarez was one of my favourite players of all time but was only unreal for about 3 maybe 4 seasons. Did u see him against lyon?

The ability to do what 99.9% of players cant is what makes players great. Hat tricks against spain in the world cup, hattricks in the latter stages of champions leagues etc. Ronaldo in any team maoes it better. Fact.

Ronaldo has five Ballon d'Or awards, the most for a European player, and is the first player to win four European Golden Shoes. He has won 27 trophies in his career, including five league titles, five UEFA Champions League titles and one UEFA European Championship. A prolific goalscorer, Ronaldo holds the records for most official goals scored in Europe's top-five leagues (414), the UEFA Champions League (121), the UEFA European Championship (9), as well as those for most assists in the UEFA Champions League (34) and the UEFA European Championship (6).

The Golden Miller

charolais0153 wrote: »

**** off about ronaldo and his goals. Xavi is a great player that never scored,for the very same reason ronaldo is a great. 700 odd goals in a career is quite staggering,dont you think?

Suarez was one of my favourite players of all time but was only unreal for about 3 maybe 4 seasons. Did u see him against lyon?

The ability to do what 99.9% of players cant is what makes players great. Hat tricks against spain in the world cup, hattricks in the latter stages of champions leagues etc. Ronaldo in any team maoes it better. Fact.

Ronaldo has five Ballon d'Or awards, the most for a European player, and is the first player to win four European Golden Shoes. He has won 27 trophies in his career, including five league titles, five UEFA Champions League titles and one UEFA European Championship. A prolific goalscorer, Ronaldo holds the records for most official goals scored in Europe's top-five leagues (414), the UEFA Champions League (121), the UEFA European Championship (9), as well as those for most assists in the UEFA Champions League (34) and the UEFA European Championship (6).

So Suarez has only been good for 3 or 4 seasons and is past it, while Ronaldo has about 3 extra goals this season and is one of the best in the world? Great logic. Ye Suarez was rubbish against Lyon, just like Ronaldo was against Atletico. But the reason we criticise Suarez so heavily, is because his general creativity has gone to sh!t, despite knocking in over 15 goals this season. While Ronaldo has been similar, yet is still rated as one of the best in the world. This is the same kind of inconsistent logic that creates a general consensus that Gerd Muller was "just a goal scorer", whereas Ronaldo is one of the best ever, despite also being just a goal scorer.

The hat-trick against Spain? Ah yes, the peno, the 1 out of 50 attempts free kick, and the tap in. And yet, ultimately limped out of the world cup with an anonymous performance, due to the shortcomings in his game I outlined i.e no real ability to get on the ball and control the game like all the other greats could do.

You've not actually addressed anything I've said, just gone to the default position of "goal stats" I predicted. So he's "just a goal-scorer" then? You know, the disparaging remark always put to guys like Gerd Muller to show they ain't on the same level as the great players like Maradona etc? Why does Ronaldo deserve extra plaudits that the other "just goal scorers" don't get, when he has such shortcomings in his overall game? And it was really exposed tonight, when you see how guys like Griezmann perform while not scoring and what they add. And Griezmann didn't even play exceptionally well, yet lightyears ahead of Ronaldo in footballing brain and craft. Elaborate on how Ronaldo is a great of the game without referring to goal stats, which we don't need to do for Cruyff, Maradona, Hagi, Zidane, Ronaldo, Messi, Nedved, Del Piero, Zidane, Kaka etc etc.

The Talking Bread

Every bloody year!!!!!!

irishguitarlad

I see a lot of United fans raging about Golden Miller's United posts.

GavRedKing

Last nights performance of Costa showed exactly what we miss at Chelsea, missing the one on one a side, he was good for the time he was on the pitch, even got banned from the return leg in under 10mins for a very harsh yellow card.

He occupied 2 very good CBs and didnt really give them any rest and when hes in the mood, hes usually a good watch because he could score or get half a dozen players involved in a scrap.

Jelle1880

I bloody love Simeone.

charolais0153

The Golden Miller wrote: »

So Suarez has only been good for 3 or 4 seasons and is past it, while Ronaldo has about 3 extra goals this season and is one of the best in the world? Great logic. Ye Suarez was rubbish against Lyon, just like Ronaldo was against Atletico. But the reason we criticise Suarez so heavily, is because his general creativity has gone to sh!t, despite knocking in over 15 goals this season. While Ronaldo has been similar, yet is still rated as one of the best in the world. This is the same kind of inconsistent logic that creates a general consensus that Gerd Muller was "just a goal scorer", whereas Ronaldo is one of the best ever, despite also being just a goal scorer.

The hat-trick against Spain? Ah yes, the peno, the 1 out of 50 attempts free kick, and the tap in. And yet, ultimately limped out of the world cup with an anonymous performance, due to the shortcomings in his game I outlined i.e no real ability to get on the ball and control the game like all the other greats could do.

You've not actually addressed anything I've said, just gone to the default position of "goal stats" I predicted. So he's "just a goal-scorer" then? You know, the disparaging remark always put to guys like Gerd Muller to show they ain't on the same level as the great players like Maradona etc? Why does Ronaldo deserve extra plaudits that the other "just goal scorers" don't get, when he has such shortcomings in his overall game? And it was really exposed tonight, when you see how guys like Griezmann perform while not scoring and what they add. And Griezmann didn't even play exceptionally well, yet lightyears ahead of Ronaldo in footballing brain and craft. Elaborate on how Ronaldo is a great of the game without referring to goal stats, which we don't need to do for Cruyff, Maradona, Hagi, Zidane, Ronaldo, Messi, Nedved, Del Piero, Zidane, Kaka etc etc.

Are ferenc puskas,gerd muller,
kaka? 56 million pounds and never performed for real madrid
Messi is the best player ever. I think you"ll agree.
All the rest are before my time.
Quick question,Why did argentina win the 1986 world cup?
Why did real madrid win the 2002 champions league?
Simply put,real wouldnt have la decima and portugal wouldnt have a euros eithout ronaldo. If thats not a testament to ronaldo i dont know what is

Liam O

irishguitarlad wrote: »

I see a lot of United fans raging about Golden Miller's United posts.

Anyone who's watched football at the top level the last 12 years (yes, that's how long he's been competing in CL latter stages and at the top of leagues) should be able to see that referring to the likes of Nedved and Hagi as being great players while Ronaldo is not is talking nonsense. His arbitrary ignorance of factors that don't suit his argument that has been put to him multiple times shows him up as the comedy figure he is. Look who's thanked his post above. Same level.

The Talking Bread

irishguitarlad wrote: »

I see a lot of United fans raging about Golden Miller's United posts.

What's it to do with Man utd?

You think Utd fans are the only ones who find his execissve constant picking holes tedious? ?

Is it an obligation that you must defend a player when you have an allegiance to a former club of his a must.
In fairness I don't see Utd holding Ronaldo in some sort of hero legacy despite what he achieved.

So if that's the merit of your point....

TheCitizen

Vincent Vega wrote: »

Yeah well, that's all fine and well, but have they won, as he so humbly reminded the Madrid press post match, 5, I repeat FIVEChampions League titles all by themselves?

Didn't think so.
https://twitter.com/partidazocope/status/1098364590927302656

That was funny, he didn’t take that defeat last night too well. Atletico were great, job only half done though

The Golden Miller

Liam O wrote: »

Anyone who's watched football at the top level the last 12 years (yes, that's how long he's been competing in CL latter stages and at the top of leagues) should be able to see that referring to the likes of Nedved and Hagi as being great players while Ronaldo is not is talking nonsense. His arbitrary ignorance of factors that don't suit his argument that has been put to him multiple times shows him up as the comedy figure he is. Look who's thanked his post above. Same level.

Where did I say Ronaldo wasn't a great player? So any criticism of facets in Ronaldo's game is saying he's rubbish altogether? Why confound what isn't being said, to talk down someone's point? I simply asked for someone to elaborate on why he's a great player, without referring to his goal stats, because we don't do that when talking about any of the other greats. Because I'm constantly told he doesn't fall into the "just a goal scorer" bracket, that this guy is rated as one of the two best players ever by many.

Nedved and Hagi regularly displayed a multitude of attributes that were befitting of great players, as did Griezmann last night for example, despite not scoring. Criteria that we apply across the board when looking for greatness. Facets to his game Ronaldo has always lacked, which are particularly evident when he doesn't score.

Funny how people say the points I make are ridiculous, spend ages trying to refute what I say, yet will do anything but discuss his game outside of reeling off goal stats and ballon d'or wins

charolais0153 wrote: »

Are ferenc puskas,gerd muller,
kaka? 56 million pounds and never performed for real madrid
Messi is the best player ever. I think you"ll agree.
All the rest are before my time.
Quick question,Why did argentina win the 1986 world cup?
Why did real madrid win the 2002 champions league?
Simply put,real wouldnt have la decima and portugal wouldnt have a euros eithout ronaldo. If thats not a testament to ronaldo i dont know what is

What's that about Puskas? Kaka, yes didn't perform for Madrid, does that take away from what he did with Milan?.

Argentina won the world cup in 1986, due in no small part to Maradona. He was the focal point who drove his team to greater heights with his leadership, influence, technical ability, vision and creativity, dribbling and passing etc. He could get on the ball and run the show.

If you're trying to infer Ronaldo was the same influence in Portugal's Euro's win then you're wholly deluded my friend. Portugal's win was due to the system they employed, rigid and hard to beat, with Ronaldo being an outlet, and even at that was fairly poor in the tournament. When he went off in the final, they carried on as before, he brought nothing to how they set up and played.

I'd also argue that Madrid would have won la Decima without Ronaldo. He scored in games they had already won really, the penalty in the final summing it all up

Liam O

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Where did I say Ronaldo wasn't a great player? I simply asked for someone to elaborate on why he's a great player, without referring to his goal stats, because we don't do that when talking about any of the other greats. Because I'm constantly told he doesn't fall into the "just a goal scorer" bracket, that this guy is rated as one of the two best players ever by many.

Nedved and Hagi regularly displayed a multitude of attributes that were befitting of great players, as did Griezmann last night for example, despite not scoring. Criteria that we apply across the board when looking for greatness. Facets to his game Ronaldo has always lacked, which are particularly evident when he doesn't score.

Funny how people say the points I make are ridiculous, spend ages trying to refute what I say, yet will do anything but discuss his game outside of reeling off goal stats and ballon d'or wins



What's that about Puskas? Kaka, yes didn't perform for Madrid, does that take away from what he did with Milan?.

Argentina won the world cup in 1986, due in no small part to Maradona. He was the focal point who drove his team to greater heights with his leadership, influence, technical ability, vision and creativity, dribbling and passing etc. He could get on the ball and run the show.

If you're trying to infer Ronaldo was the same influence in Portugal's Euro's win then you're wholly deluded my friend. Portugal's win was due to the system they employed, rigid and hard to beat, with Ronaldo being an outlet, and even at that was fairly poor in the tournament. When he went off in the final, they carried on as before, he brought nothing to how they set up and played.

I'd also argue that Madrid would have won la Decima without Ronaldo. He scored in games they had already won really, the penalty in the final summing it all up

You think they'd have won the 13/14 CL without the 17 goals he scored. Fine.

The 15/16 one without the 16 goals he scored? Fine I guess.

16/17 he only got 12 I guess, but still, starting to think he's important.

17/18 he only got 15 in the tournament but sure anyone could have scored those goals.

You'd honestly think you'd have given up by now. We've never seen a player like Ronaldo. Him and Messi are the 2 best to ever play. Nobody has come close to them for over a decade now.

The Golden Miller

Liam O wrote: »

You think they'd have won the 13/14 CL without the 17 goals he scored. Fine.

The 15/16 one without the 16 goals he scored? Fine I guess.

16/17 he only got 12 I guess, but still, starting to think he's important.

17/18 he only got 15 in the tournament but sure anyone could have scored those goals.

You'd honestly think you'd have given up by now. We've never seen a player like Ronaldo. Him and Messi are the 2 best to ever play. Nobody has come close to them for over a decade now.

Well, they would have in 13/14. Go look and see when he scored the goals he did, they cantered to the final regardless. His set up in Madrid has always been extremely favourable, any decent striker would have over inflated stats at that club. Same at Barca.

So Ronaldo is one of the two best ever? Why? Goal stats? Gerd Mullers goal ratio's are actually better than Ronaldo. Surely he's the best ever then?

charolais0153

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Where did I say Ronaldo wasn't a great player? So any criticism of facets in Ronaldo's game is saying he's rubbish altogether? Why confound what isn't being said, to talk down someone's point? I simply asked for someone to elaborate on why he's a great player, without referring to his goal stats, because we don't do that when talking about any of the other greats. Because I'm constantly told he doesn't fall into the "just a goal scorer" bracket, that this guy is rated as one of the two best players ever by many.

Nedved and Hagi regularly displayed a multitude of attributes that were befitting of great players, as did Griezmann last night for example, despite not scoring. Criteria that we apply across the board when looking for greatness. Facets to his game Ronaldo has always lacked, which are particularly evident when he doesn't score.

Funny how people say the points I make are ridiculous, spend ages trying to refute what I say, yet will do anything but discuss his game outside of reeling off goal stats and ballon d'or wins

The Golden Miller wrote: »

What's that about Puskas? Kaka, yes didn't perform for Madrid, does that take away from what he did with Milan?.

Thats why i think ronaldo is one of the greatest ever,he performed for over a decade at the highest level, kaka and suarez et al didnt.

I was just wondering if you think puskas or muller would be classed in the same ilk as cruyff in your opinion or are they on a lower rung of the ladder?

The Golden Miller wrote: »

argentina won the world cup in 1986, due in no small part to Maradona. He was the focal point who drove his team to greater heights with his leadership, influence, technical ability, vision and creativity, dribbling and passing etc. He could get on the ball and run the show.

Would they have beaten england without him, what two moments in particular were the most decisive in their victory

The Golden Miller wrote: »

if you're trying to infer Ronaldo was the same influence in Portugal's Euro's win then you're wholly deluded my friend. Portugal's win was due to the system they employed, rigid and hard to beat, with Ronaldo being an outlet, and even at that was fairly poor in the tournament. When he went off in the final, they carried on as before, he brought nothing to how they set up and played.

does malsinis efforts for milan make crespos and kakas achievemnts any less worthwhile? So what id they were rigid and hard to beat, most successful tournament teams are.
they wouldn't have gotten out of the group stages only for him. Was the differnec against wales. Had 3 assists in the tournament.
How did the all-round griezmann do in the final?

The Golden Miller wrote: »

'd also argue that Madrid would have won la Decima without Ronaldo. He scored in games they had already won really, the penalty in the final summing it all up

Yep. His goals didnt matter at all.even though they would have lost to juve twice and drew with dortmund.

LuckyLloyd

Boring. Keep labelling an athlete or a team as bottlers or not good enough or some such and celebrate when they stutter towards the tail end of their natural career arc taking it as proof of being "right" all along.

Ronaldo is 34 years old, ~950 games and countless awards and medals into his senior career.

The Golden Miller

charolais0153 wrote: »

Thats why i think ronaldo is one of the greatest ever,he performed for over a decade at the highest level, kaka and suarez et al didnt.

I was just wondering if you think puskas or muller would be classed in the same ilk as cruyff in your opinion or are they on a lower rung of the ladder?

Puskas was before my time, but by all accounts, and from what I've seen of him, he was a complete player, exceptional technically, and great vision. Muller though, yes would be on a lower rung. What do you think? Are "just goal scorer" on a pedestal with the greats, or should they be ranked among themselves, the best in their position? But it's not very often you get a goal scorer who is so generally lethargic in open play as Ronaldo

But Suarez is still doing it. Scoring goals and being poor in general play, ye? Isn't that what Ronaldo has made a career of?

charolais0153 wrote: »

Would they have beaten england without him, what two moments in particular were the most decisive in their victory
does malsinis efforts for milan make crespos and kakas achievemnts any less worthwhile?

No they wouldn't have beaten England. Maradona and Kaka were complete midfielders, technically proficient all round.

charolais0153 wrote: »

they wouldn't have gotten out of the group stages only for him. Was the differnec against wales. Had 3 assists in the tournament.
How did the all-round griezmann do in the final?


Yep. His goals didnt matter at all.even though they would have lost to juve twice and drew with dortmund.

If it wasn't for Gareth Bale, Madrid wouldn't of got draw with Juve either. Are these the semantics you want to go to, to try and deflect from glaring deficiencies in Ronaldo's game? If Modric didn't make a certain pass, Madrid wouldn't of won either. The reality is, Madrid were comfortable with or without Ronaldo, as were Portugal. Argentina without Maradona, not the same team

So because proven all round players like Kaka and Maradona didn't do it every single game, that that gives Ronaldo's continually abject performances in open play a pass? Maradona and Kaka were the fulcrum in their teams, as is Griezmann and have proved it time and time again. Ronaldo has been deployed as an outlet for his career, wholly reliant on others. And as last night once again proved, when there isn't a goal to paper over the cracks, he's lethargic. Yet Griezmann doesn't score, look what he adds.

The Golden Miller

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Boring. Keep labelling an athlete or a team as bottlers or not good enough or some such and celebrate when they stutter towards the tail end of their natural career arc taking it as proof of being "right" all along.

Ronaldo is 34 years old, ~950 games and countless awards and medals into his senior career.

If that's directed at me, for better or worse, I've been consistent with the same criticism of Ronaldo his whole career

Liam O

The Golden Miller wrote: »

If that's directed at me, for better or worse, I've been consistent with the same criticism of Ronaldo his whole career

The fact that even Eamon Dunphy admitted he was wrong after a few years and you're still beating the drum is quite incredible alright.

Scott Tenorman

The Golden Miller wrote: »

If that's directed at me, for better or worse, I've been consistent with the same criticism of Ronaldo his whole career

I think the point that LL is making is that you will eventually be "right" when Ronaldo naturally deteriorates due to age, that doesn't mean you weren't wrong for the preceeding 20 years!