Its a simple question, who do you think was better and why? (without considering ronaldo post injury)

I think its difficult to say which is better, as strikers they were both phenomenal in different ways. Ronaldo had the ability to change the game in a flash, he could be quiet for 20 minutes and then BANG, he would destroy the opponents defence. Van basten was a better target man, better playing with his back to goal and linking attacks. Both of them were great goalscorers, maybe van basten was a better scorer of great goals though. Tough one but i slightly prefer van basten

If you had a team with great playmakers than they both would be tough to turn down.. If you needed a one man army then you go with Ronaldo

Both are excellent finishers and can pass the ball very well, so I would always choose the striker that can dribble through whole teams over the one that can't..

Van Basten was a much, much better overall football player. It's not just about how you play... it's also about making others around you better by just playing with you.

Ronaldo pre injury and imagining he never gets injured like that? Him and I didnt have to think that much.

No disrespect to Van Basten.

The thing is that a lot of the way players are carded now is due to the injuries that happened late 80s and early 90s. Before, you had to commit a crime to get a yellow and murder (and even then) to get a red. Nowadays, players are a lot more protected.

Van Basten wall like a ballet dancer on the pitch. Fluid grace. Only plays that reminded me of Zidane with how effortless and fluid he was.

As much as I love, respect and admire Ronaldo I'd take Van Basten over him any day. Van Basten was the Ibra of his time and controlled the game when he wasn't scoring and made everything look effortless. So fluid, influential and technical his game that it was made too look easy. Under Sacchi he expanded and developed his game further to play the first notes of a False 9 forward as seeing him and Donadini combine when MvB dropped deep out wide (in compressed defence) was a work of art. I don't even have to mention what he has won and did for his teams.

Ronaldo over here is never mentioned of all the games he didn't do so well in along with his rather average Champions League record. He deserves all his plaudits yet I cannot see how he was a superior footballer than Van Basten who isn't mentioned enough around here.

For all the talk of Ronaldo's injuries does anyone even know that MvB retired at the age of 30 (with Milan) due to a permanent injury? Puts things into perspective doesn't it?

Ronaldo got injured at like 22 though Arq..

They're both elite strikers but like I said, one guy could destroy a team all by himself..

Van Basten was better than Ronaldo for me, I rank both amongst the best 5 centre forwards of all time but for me Marco van Basten was the best centre forward in the history of football.

Van Basten was a better finisher with both feet (or at least as good), much better in the air, better crosser of the ball, better at assisting team mates, smarter on & off the ball, better freekicks, better poacher, better volleys & a better passer of the ball, he was much more complete than Ronaldo & definitely less wasteful, he was a better team player.

Ronaldo was a better dribbler & had more pace.... there was nothing between them as goalscorers, both scored for fun when injury free so there is no superiority here either way... Marco scored more from outside the box also.

Ronaldo was indeed a phenom but Marco for me is the most complete & technically sound centre forward of all time... he is what all centre forwards should try emulate.

Arquitecto wrote:As much as I love, respect and admire Ronaldo I'd take Van Basten over him any day. Van Basten was the Ibra of his time and controlled the game when he wasn't scoring and made everything look effortless. So fluid, influential and technical his game that it was made too look easy. Under Sacchi he expanded and developed his game further to play the first notes of a False 9 forward as seeing him and Donadini combine when MvB dropped deep out wide (in compressed defence) was a work of art. I don't even have to mention what he has won and did for his teams.

Ronaldo over here is never mentioned of all the games he didn't do so well in along with his rather average Champions League record. He deserves all his plaudits yet I cannot see how he was a superior footballer than Van Basten who isn't mentioned enough around here.

For all the talk of Ronaldo's injuries does anyone even know that MvB retired at the age of 30 (with Milan) due to a permanent injury? Puts things into perspective doesn't it?

True, Van Basten doesn`t get mentioned enough & Marco actually played his last game at age 28... though he officially announced his retirement at age 30 after 2 yrs of surgery fighting a lost cause with his damaged ankle.

I already rate MVB a top 10 all time player, he could have cracked the top 5 if he never got injured & played another 6 or so yrs at the highest level, he was THAT good IMO.

Compare Van Basten to Ronalo is like compare Ibra(IBra is even most skillfull Than Vb) to Messi.


Van Basten was not a player close to Ronaldo.

The truth is that Van Basten played in an era mediocre, where he had no other competitors and Milan dominated.


We want to compare the years before they both were playing in Italy?

Ronaldo 172 apps and 166 goals gpg 0.96

Van Basten 172 apps and 152 goals gpg 0.88


Ronaldo and Van Basten at 28

played in eras of football so similar and in the same leagues are comparable, Van basten played even with better team.

Van Basten 276 goals in 373 apps 0.73

Ronaldo at 28
309 goals in 393 apps 0.78

so Ronaldo is clearly better and in Nt no comparasion

Copa America: 13 caps, 10 goals, 3 assists (1.00)
Confederations Cup: 5 caps, 4 goals, 2 assists (1.20)
World Cup: 19 caps, 15 goals, 5 assists (1.50)

Ronaldo was certainly a most skillfull player, Van Basten was better than Ronaldo only in air, for the rest Ronaldo wins easily.

Even in vision of the Game, Vb 61 assist, Ronaldo 131 assist abyss


Van Basten played well for the strongest teams


It takes 10 VB to do the Ronaldo pre-injury as it takes 10 Ibra to do a  Messi

Van Basten was a great player, but he had nothing of special, but everything he does,  can Ibra, Cavani, Falcao etc..

Today goals like these can only Messi

Killer wrote:The truth is that Van Basten played in an era mediocre, where he had no other competitors and Milan dominated.

What rubbish.

That Milan team was the greatest of all time, but not for lack of competition. Van Basten was one of the players who made the team as great as it was.

Furthermore, your arguments all seem to be based on the presumption that MVB played for far better teams than Ronaldo and that is the major reason MVB performed better. Let's not forget that Ronaldo is one of the few players who played for both Milan teams AND the top 2 Spanish teams. Not too shabby at all.

After this, I (very generously) continued to read on, only to find an unintelligible mix of incomplete sentences and incomplete statistics.

Forza wrote:

Killer wrote:The truth is that Van Basten played in an era mediocre, where he had no other competitors and Milan dominated.

What rubbish.

That Milan team was the greatest of all time, but not for lack of competition. Van Basten was one of the players who made the team as great as it was.

Furthermore, your arguments all seem to be based on the presumption that MVB played for far better teams than Ronaldo and that is the major reason MVB performed better. Let's not forget that Ronaldo is one of the few players who played for both Milan teams AND the top 2 Spanish teams. Not too shabby at all.

After this, I (very generously) continued to read on, only to find an unintelligible mix of incomplete sentences and incomplete statistics.

the 80s in European Cup was a mediocre era, AC Milan had no opponents outside of Italy.


in the first European the opponents of AC Milan were Vitosha Sofia, Stella Rossa, (good but not comparable to Mu, Psg, Barca, Bayern ecc.), Werder Brema, Real Madrid(not even close to what is now the Real madrid), Steaua Bucarest.


The European Cup is much easier to win that Champions League, often the average level of the teams was below of the Uefa Cup.


Ronaldo played with the Inter, AC Milan, Real and Barca but with what, Inter, Milan, Barca or Real?

The teams are not all equal. Guarin plays with the Inter, but Inter today sucks, and even Milan.

The Inter of Ronaldo was not a great team and Barcellona was a good team but at National level.


Real Madrid was great in the name, but not have organizzation, they do not win the champions leagues from 12 years because not have organization, and the last 3 Lige that have won 2 have won with Ronaldo.

Killer wrote:

Forza wrote:

Killer wrote:The truth is that Van Basten played in an era mediocre, where he had no other competitors and Milan dominated.

What rubbish.

That Milan team was the greatest of all time, but not for lack of competition. Van Basten was one of the players who made the team as great as it was.

Furthermore, your arguments all seem to be based on the presumption that MVB played for far better teams than Ronaldo and that is the major reason MVB performed better. Let's not forget that Ronaldo is one of the few players who played for both Milan teams AND the top 2 Spanish teams. Not too shabby at all.

After this, I (very generously) continued to read on, only to find an unintelligible mix of incomplete sentences and incomplete statistics.

the 80s in European Cup was a mediocre era, AC Milan had no opponents outside of Italy.


in the first European the opponents of AC Milan were Vitosha Sofia, Stella Rossa, (good but not comparable to Mu, Psg, Barca, Bayern ecc.), Werder Brema, Real Madrid(not even close to what is now the Real madrid), Steaua Bucarest.


The European Cup is much easier to win that Champions League, often the average level of the teams was below of the Uefa Cup.


Ronaldo played with the Inter, AC Milan, Real and Barca but with what, Inter, Milan, Barca or Real?

The teams are not all equal. Guarin plays with the Inter, but Inter today sucks, and even Milan.

The Inter of Ronaldo was not a great team and Barcellona was a good team but at National level.


Real Madrid was great in the name, but not have organizzation, they do not win the champions leagues from 12 years because not have organization, and the last 3 Lige that have won 2 have won with Ronaldo.

El phenomeno has never won a CL .

Bénin wrote:

Killer wrote:

Forza wrote:
What rubbish.

That Milan team was the greatest of all time, but not for lack of competition. Van Basten was one of the players who made the team as great as it was.

Furthermore, your arguments all seem to be based on the presumption that MVB played for far better teams than Ronaldo and that is the major reason MVB performed better. Let's not forget that Ronaldo is one of the few players who played for both Milan teams AND the top 2 Spanish teams. Not too shabby at all.

After this, I (very generously) continued to read on, only to find an unintelligible mix of incomplete sentences and incomplete statistics.

the 80s in European Cup was a mediocre era, AC Milan had no opponents outside of Italy.


in the first European the opponents of AC Milan were Vitosha Sofia, Stella Rossa, (good but not comparable to Mu, Psg, Barca, Bayern ecc.), Werder Brema, Real Madrid(not even close to what is now the Real madrid), Steaua Bucarest.


The European Cup is much easier to win that Champions League, often the average level of the teams was below of the Uefa Cup.


Ronaldo played with the Inter, AC Milan, Real and Barca but with what, Inter, Milan, Barca or Real?

The teams are not all equal. Guarin plays with the Inter, but Inter today sucks, and even Milan.

The Inter of Ronaldo was not a great team and Barcellona was a good team but at National level.


Real Madrid was great in the name, but not have organizzation, they do not win the champions leagues from 12 years because not have organization, and the last 3 Lige that have won 2 have won with Ronaldo.

El phenomeno has never won a CL .

who said??

Liga not CL

Van Basten is not remotely close to him, this was from another world

Van Basten did practically everything better than Ronaldo, he was a better overall player by a fair stretch, you can argue who`s the best goal scorer all day long but in reality nothing separates them in goal scoring, both were amongst the best ever... Marco was quite simply a more complete & better player, I`d expect the majority of fan (like myself) that have seen BOTH play to say Van Basten, I`d expect the younger ones that grew up thinking R9 was the best thing since sliced bread to say R9 was better without even having seen MVB play.

Moved and bumped.

Bringing up an old thread, since I wanna see what those of you who did see Van Basten play think just how good was he?

His playing time I was too young to know, but I happen to come across a highlights clips of him (quite long one, over 17mins long), and Im amazed, probably better than absolutely most of clips I have seen of ANY player. I can only go by that, and also from doing some searches on the net. Van Basten is ranked VERY highly in historic terms. I remember ppl used to call him, Gullit, Rajikaard, the Dutch trio that dominated football for a few years? But nowadays he doesnt seem to get managed at all when ppl talk about greatest/best ever players? Even in this thread I see a lot of varied opinions.

I used to think Far Ronaldo was the best striker, but after watching this clip Im not so sure, Van Basten just looks AMAZING.

So for those that watched the game back then, what was it really like? And if u compare to todays strikers?

Maybe I need to post again to make it renew to the top? Trying now...

Van Basten was godly... so elegant. Think Zidane type elegance but in a striker as a comparison. It seemed like the game was easy and natural for him while the others were playing hard.

It's close with R9. I take R9 because of his athleticism pre-injury.

2012  
time flies and we still argue which celebrity was better

No one compares to el fenomeno as far as I'm concerned - the best CF in history, bar none.

I used to say R9 too, but really how many of us are old enough to have watched Van Basten during his days and judged? For those interested, really look up one of those long highlight clips of his, just amazing.

Is the modern equivalent Kane vs Mbappe?