Cristiano Ronaldo: "I'm the best player in the world. I am a legend"

Is there any chance that El Kommander is actually DER KOMMANDER CR7???

He is the best Ronaldo tbh. That's pretty much confirmed.

RealGunner wrote:He is the best Ronaldo tbh. That's pretty much confirmed.

Had the best career obviously, but prime Ronaldo Nazario is 10x the player CR ever was.

Nearly everyone's memory of R9 here is tainted by the fact that we watched him as kids. There's a huge nostalgia factor involved.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:Nearly everyone's memory of R9 here is tainted by the fact that we watched him as kids. There's a huge nostalgia factor involved.

I didn't watch him as a kid. In his prime, he was 10x better than this Ronaldo. The big differentiation is that, despite his amazing individual skills, his skills for the benefit of the team were the best part. It's like comparing Messi's stats and CR's... they may look similar statistically. But when you look at overall team impact, Messi in his prime was miles above CR.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:Nearly everyone's memory of R9 here is tainted by the fact that we watched him as kids. There's a huge nostalgia factor involved.

Man, players like Kaká and Robben had higher peaks than CR in my opinion, let alone R9. CR7 is about consistency.

sportsczy wrote:

BarrileteCosmico wrote:Nearly everyone's memory of R9 here is tainted by the fact that we watched him as kids. There's a huge nostalgia factor involved.

I didn't watch him as a kid.  In his prime, he was 10x better than this Ronaldo.  The big differentiation is that, despite his amazing individual skills, his skills for the benefit of the team were the best part.  It's like comparing Messi's stats and CR's... they may look similar statistically.  But when you look at overall team impact, Messi in his prime was miles above CR.

Always was and still is, this "rivalry" is the most media fabricated bs ever, they aren't even remotely in the same tier.

Ronaldo is underrated by a lot of people because of his popularity and the way the media and a lot of fans shove him down their throats.

R9 is overrated by a lot of people because of his peak.

I think because R7 is still playing and deteriorating people forget that he was extremely dominant at his peak as well, not to mention to be able to hold his level of play for such a long and consistent time is unreal. There have been more talented players but none with the same level of work ethic as Cristiano.

While Messi is undoubtedly the better all time player I think you would be very hard pressed to find many if any that are Ronaldo's equal otherwise and the gap is not large.

I'm sorry but it's pretty obvious if you watch both R9 and CR (any version), it is clear R9 is the much better footballer. The only area CR is better than R9 in is aerially. That is it.

People seem to be using goal tallies to judge players now. Let us not forget that Dzeko is currently on 29, Suarez got 59 last year. In this era, with the referees protecting players, better pitches and players not tackling from behind, R9 would be getting 60+ goals a season. Not only that, most of the talent is hoarded in a very small amount of teams. EVen Higuain is breaking records in Serie A. Something that would have been unthinkable in the 90s and early 2000s before Calciopoli.

CR has been consistent at goal scoring, but he is a double edged sword and others have to be subservient to him, like Rooney and Benzema. R9 at Inter was a #10 and was literally their whole attack.

@Curtinho when you say equal to Ronaldo what do you mean? In what terms? Consistency is all well and good but Ronaldo in his career has never had the ability nor the performance level of R9, Maradona, Messi etc just to name a few. He is simply not on their level.

A lot of things that you point out that supposedly make the game easier to score in today are fine and well, but have you watched the players in the past and the defenses they had to play against? Maybe there was a tough physical toll from the physicality of it, but defenses today are much better organized, more fit, smarter, and better footballers in general. Tactics, footage, coaches...so much is different.

Many people point to technical ability going away or less spectacular things on the field, but that's a byproduct of the increased average level of play. Players have so much less time on the ball than they used to. I can't tell you how many times I've watched old matches or highlights and I'm looking at the kind of space players like Maradona or Pele had to make moves or the complete farcical defensive organization around them.

Someone like Cristiano as he was from like 06 to 12 would have absolutely terrorized those kinds of defenses assuming he wasn't injured or whatever. It's pointless to compare across eras in that way. I can think of many elite level performances that Ronaldo has had throughout his career that are on par with the greats, and he's done it at a consistency level that is pretty much unmatched.

Even the slating of Higuain is unfounded. Again, it's a different era and time and Higuain is better than many give him credit for. We're in an age where we have so much more access to video, angles, other elite players, etc. that every little thing is scrutinized to a completely different level than any players before this generation. R9 was not perfect and he didn't have masterful games every game and no he wasn't on a higher level than CR7.

Great points.  With regards to the past, I' was referring to the 90s early 2000s.

Compared to the pre 90s, You say they had more space to run into in the earlier era but you forget the offside rule was different. Back then anyone offside automatically invalidated attacks. How many goals have we seen today with a player just walking about in an offside position  and one of his teammates breaks through the flanks/centre and gives a square pass for an easy tap in?

As for tactics, they haven't improved. Tactics don't improve or regress, they are an overall response to a tactical problem at the time. For example, pep Guardiola's Barcelona would not be able to play the same way that they did today simply because the game has already evolved and teams have adapted as they do to new trends. Teams already started adapting to it in 11/12 by ceding the flanks Messi played in the centre. Mourinho's early success in Chelsea came about because in the EPL, everyone used 442 and he simply removed a striker and placed them in front of the defence meaning that he had a numerical advantage over pretty much every midfield in the league and Chelsea dominated the league for 2 seasons. It was a response, and eventually the tactic became invalidated and less effective as EPL teams started fielding more mf.

Defences have to be much more organised because individuals can't get away with much anymore. Anticipation has become more important than physicality whereas in the past it was less so also defenders have to do far more than in the past and I believe it is actually harder to be a top defender in this era than in the past as you can't get away with much physically and are punished far harsher.

Also, this is the supposed hardest league to score in today...



The average player could be technically better compared to the average player of past eras, I concede that, but I'm not sure the average elite player is a better technically than those of the past.

Is Cristiano Ronaldo a better technician than Luis Figo? Is Neymar a better technician than Ronaldinho? Is Messi a better technician than Maradona? Is Bale a better technician than George Best? Is Bieber a better Pop music than Madonna? Are you smarter than your parents?

In my opinion: technique does not work the way tactics work, nor the way stamina works. There's close to nothing to suggest that the elite players of today have better technique than the elite players of 10-20 years ago. The automatisms now with teams being a lot more structured due to the aforementioned less time on the ball means that even technically "average" players today can look very good because they are drilled a lot more. Look at how Busquets has gone from supposedly being the best Dm to being in poor form over the last seasons because he simply had more space to defend.

The improvement of average players as a  whole is balanced by average teams being far weaker in this era due to all the technical and great players in this era being gathered in super teams, which are far more prevalent today than in any other era. So average players being better than average players in the past is countered by the fact that these super teams are so vastly superior relative to the old teams that had one or two stars in their respective teams, that it's arguably easier for an elite player to look good against average opponents (compared to past eras). Suarez scoring 59 goals in his first full season at Barcelona. Mario Gomez reaching 40 goals with Bayern in 11/12, Lewandowski with 42 goals last year, Ibra getting 50 goals, Dzeko already on 29 as I mentioned earlier, Higuain breaking the Serie A goal scoring record. With regards to Higuain, I agree he is a great striker, but compared to Serie A in the 90s, he has far more space to attack. Serie A teams are far more attacking now than they were in the 90s as a result of a tactical response to the trquartista. Teams started fielding 2 and sometimes 3 destroyers to mark trequartistas out of the game and make them ineffective and most teams sat deep, played with 3 at the back and played either a 2-1-2 or a 3 2 attack. It is by far the hardest league for attackers there has been in my lifetime. Strikers on average struggled to get the ball because the midfield was so packed. Players like Zidane, Totti, R9 and Rui Costa had to be very create to compensate. I'll talk more about that below.

The teams that CR has played in have been superior to any team R9 has played in his career. R9 was never afforded the luxury of playing the free role that CR is playing. At Barcelona we all saw what R9 was capable of and he reached a higher level for Inter imo. As I mentioned before, he played in a league where trequartistas where shouldering the creative burden and the mf areas where becoming cul da sacs and the amount of service he got compared to CR is really not comparable to be honest. He was playing with Djorkaeff and Zamorano in the final third and was pretty much the teams entire attack. CR plays with Benzema, Bale, played with Rooney Tevez and they all worked in Unison to create space for him and he cannibalises all the chances and is one of the most inefficient players in footballs history. He has taken the most shots per game since Opta stared collecting stats, he took the most shots in a single EURo history in 2012 and scored 3 goals, the same number Torres off the bench scored. Even if you compare the original Galacticos, Ronaldo was never the main man and had to share the burden with raul and morientes in set up that wasn't even tactically optimal and the league wasn't as relatively weak for me.

You say Cristiano would terrorise their defence, Imagine if we put R9 today, with better pitches, better training methods and medical facilities which he would theoretically prevent less injuries, and the way defenders stand back and raise their arms up when they get behind an attacker running towards their goal, R9 would put 60+ goals every season if he was in one of these super teams.

One thing I would add in CRs favour is that he is never injured and that must also be taken into account. But how far do we want to go here because at the end of the day comparing across eras is very difficult as the game is very different to what it was just 6 years ago let alone 20. Also considering they both play differing tactical roles, it's even more difficult to compare. For my money, R9 is the closest to Messi in terms of his ability to disrupt defences in compact areas. It then becomes difficult to judge them over thier careers. Do we take R9 from 92-2000? What about his Real Madrid years? What iteration of CR are we talking about? His 06-11/12 version where had pace and could actually dribble a cone, or the current incarnation since 13/14 that is essentially a box player?

Just threw random thoughts together so my response might not be the most coherent. I'll try to edit it when I re read it.

jibers wrote:

The teams that CR has played in have been superior to any team R9 has played in his career. R9 was never afforded the luxury of playing the free role that CR is playing. At Barcelona we all saw what R9 was capable of and he reached a higher level for Inter imo. As I mentioned before, he played in a league where trequartistas where shouldering the creative burden and the mf areas where becoming cul da sacs and the amount of service he got compared to CR is really not comparable to be honest. He was playing with Djorkaeff and Zamorano in the final third and was pretty much the teams entire attack. CR plays with Benzema, Bale, played with Rooney Tevez and they all worked in Unison to create space for him and he cannibalises all the chances and is one of the most inefficient players in footballs history. He has taken the most shots per game since Opta stared collecting stats, he took the most shots in a single EURo history in 2012 and scored 3 goals, the same number Torres off the bench scored. Even if you compare the original Galacticos, Ronaldo was never the main man and had to share the burden with raul and morientes in set up that wasn't even tactically optimal and the league wasn't as relatively weak for me.

You say Cristiano would terrorise their defence, Imagine if we put R9 today, with better pitches, better training methods and medical facilities which he would theoretically prevent less injuries, and the way defenders stand back and raise their arms up when they get behind an attacker running towards their goal, R9 would put 60+ goals every season if he was in one of these super teams.

One thing I would add in CRs favour is that he is never injured and that must also be taken into account. But how far do we want to go here because at the end of the day comparing across eras is very difficult as the game is very different to what it was just 6 years ago let alone 20. Also considering they both play differing tactical roles, it's even more difficult to compare. For my money, R9 is the closest to Messi in terms of his ability to disrupt defences in compact areas. It then becomes difficult to judge them over thier careers. Do we take R9 from 92-2000? What about his Real Madrid years? What iteration of CR are we talking about? His 06-11/12 version where had pace and could actually dribble a cone, or the current incarnation since 13/14 that is essentially a box player?

Jibers, while I don't disagree with anything you said, a true comparison of R9 vs R7 needs to include CR physical training regiment vs R9's love of food and thus R7 is superior on longevity.

The premise was "who was the better player at their peak, R9 or CR7?". As much as it's a one way discussion when it come to the peak discussion (imo), it's a similarly one way discussion when it comes the longevity part obviously. CR7 was at his peak for 8 years while R9 only had 4 truly outstanding elite seasons.

R9's seasons at Barca and his first one at Inter are second to none though. He was absolutely dominant and carried his teams, especially in big games. That's why everyone was so stunned at his non-performance in the 98 WC final... he lived for those moments. Serie A in the late 90s was incredible. Just to put it in perspective... here were the top scorers in serie A in 97-98: Bierhoff, Ronaldo, Baggio, Batistuta, Del Piero, Inzaghi and Montella. Other than Juve having 2, all the others were on different teams. Truly wonderful league back then.

Jibers, Curtinho and Sports with some fine posts. Just waiting for Madrid historian Tito to join in. Also, I was actually old enough to remember that particular season (since ESPN at the time showed Serie A frequently) and for a 10-11 year old me, I thought it was majestic so to see an older head like Sports say it was awesome, yup, I definitely was spot on in that opinion.

R9 at his peak is better than cr no nostalgia, cr goals stats looks nice but if you actually watched mou and Carlo era, the amount that goes into getting cr those goals>winning games, it literally crippled the team in plenty of big/key games, remember cr is a cancer threads? Those were prime/peak years good times , if cr had r9 like ability or superior, then there would be no need for other players to sacrifice their own games to insane lengths at times.

there are hundreds of games where cr in his prime looked awful without a tap in or a pen, honestly what's so amazing about 20 game scoring streak? when your the only one shooting, taking pens and fk, plays zero defence and waits for all best chances to fall at your feet? He scored great goals as well but 70% of his goals are meaningless, could've won more and been a better player if he focused on his overall play instead of being a poacher imo.

Cr is a great player and will have a big space in the history books, but as an individual player on pure ability he is simply level below the messi or r9 etc, thus he needs 6-9 shots per game and a ton of touches in his peak years that has to count for something.

RealGunner wrote:He is the best Ronaldo tbh. That's pretty much confirmed.

True. It's already undeniable but a lot here will undermine his overall ability because he was more athletic then talented. Some here don't rate athleticism properly and some even ignore the mental impact of CR's game. The only actual edge I can give R9 is his play on the ball and maybe his accuracy when shooting. Everywhere else it's CR.

Even referring to the 90s and early 2000s the level of play is quite clearly different. The level of athletic performance especially over the last 10-20 years has been almost exponential. I wasn't talking about the offside rule either I was talking about just any space to collect the ball -- if you watch a game today, at least at the top level, it's plainly obvious how little of time each player has on the ball to make decisions especially in midfield or up front. In the past a guy like Maradona could get the ball in midfield (one of the best players in history, mind) and who would be there? It seemed he had all the time in the world to decide what he wanted to do (relative). You don't see that with guys like Messi, Ronaldo, Hazard, etc. Generally speaking if they are getting the ball players are closing them down almost instantly and often more than one.

I disagree a bit about tactics as well. I think tactical preparation can improve especially with all the information available now versus the past. I mean, you can analyze almost everything that happens in the match down to every touch by the opposition these days with different camera angles, you have so much data, information, video and staff. Training is more intense, better structured, with individual coaches for more and more things, better athletes, more money invested, etc. Teams adjust more quickly which means managers have to be more pragmatic and dynamic in their applications of formations/tactics/philosophy etc.

I don't really think it's fair to use that goal necessarily as an example, but even if you are had someone like Maradona or R9 done something like that in the past people wouldn't be using it as a slating of the defence but to prop him up for his brilliance. That was a very nice goal by Hazard in all fairness. But that's also the difference in today and in the past on how most people view players and media, IMO.

For me it's more than just being better technically; I think that with the speed of the game in general being so much faster because of the massive difference in athleticism and training it's much harder to stand out on a technical level because you have so much less time to show that ability. I don't think that the structure and training make poor technical players look better than they are I just think that it seems like players are more poor technically because they have to make faster decisions and have less time on the ball and thus aren't going to have the same kind of space and time needed -- for example even Henderson gets rave reviews about his technical ability in training, and outshone Suarez among others but where do you ever see that in a game? Maybe once in a blue moon? Part of the problem with the speed of the game increasing, and the structure and intensity is that it somewhat stifles individuality and creativity in some ways. You can see it maybe a bit more drastically with hockey.

I also don't really agree with the superteam thing making it balanced but that's a much longer post and I'll get to that eventually.

As far as Ronaldo goes though again, he takes maybe 2 shots more a game than someone like Messi (this season only half a shot more) guys like Aguero, Ibra, etc. all take a lot of shots too. One thing that is worth noting is that Ronaldo is also a master of finding space to shoot, or getting into open spaces and drifting into scoring positions. It's a very underrated part of his game. As another poster mentioned I don't think that people respect the different facets of football enough at times and just view players that are good on the ball, who can dribble a lot or make perfect passes at a very high rate as being the epitome of football. There's so much more to the game than that, IMO, and I think that Cristiano excels in many areas that aren't as obvious in terms of flash and excitement. Why does he score so many 'tap ins'? Why is he always getting off so many shots? How is it that despite his so called selfishness he creates nearly as many chances for his teammates to score as Messi does (1.8 key passes game vs. 2.2 for Messi)? Since 2009 they've both played 350 games, Ronaldo has 361 goals and 106 assist and Messi has 157 goals and 127 assists. 21 more assists over 350 games doesn't seem like a massive difference and that's a fairly large sample size (keep in mind too, that Ronaldo has become more selfish and less dynamic over time). Stats obviously don't tell the whole story but despite the shooting inefficiency he is an incredibly efficient player at creating goals which is the hardest and most important thing in soccer.

For me Ronaldo's peak, as I said, was from 06-12 (and that's a very long peak). I think he did more, he was less stiff and more flexible as a player and contributed more overall. That said his consistency is still undeniable and remarkable and even as essentially a wide poacher he does more than he is given credit for.

I hope all that made sense.

chad4401 wrote:R9 at his peak is better than cr no nostalgia, cr goals stats looks nice but if you actually watched mou and Carlo era, the amount that goes into getting cr those goals>winning games, it literally crippled the team in plenty of big/key games, remember cr is a cancer threads? Those were prime/peak years good times , if cr had r9 like ability or superior, then there would be no need for other players to sacrifice their own games to insane lengths at times.

there are hundreds of games where cr in his prime looked awful without a tap in or a pen, honestly what's so amazing about 20 game scoring streak? when your the only one shooting, taking pens and fk, plays zero defence and waits for all best chances to fall at your feet? He scored great goals as well but 70% of his goals are meaningless, could've won more and been a better player if he focused on his overall play instead of being a poacher imo.

Cr is a great player and will have a big space in the history books, but as an individual player on pure ability he is simply level below the messi or r9 etc, thus he needs 6-9 shots per game and a ton of touches in his peak years that has to count for something.

This was enjoyable

Just to reiterate a point. This is the Ronaldo that people forget because he was forced to change his game because of his knees and the number of fouls he received (or maybe because he's selfish). I mean people point to R9's injuries ruining his career but fail to recognize that R7 has had to make major changes to his game too because of his injuries his inability to play the same way he once did (and he got fouled like crazy in the past as well). Just another thing that is extremely impressive about him. 42 goals, 8 assists (including scoring in the CL final) in 49 games as a winger for United -- a ridiculous season. Up there with any of the greats really.

Curtinho wrote:Even referring to the 90s and early 2000s the level of play is quite clearly different. The level of athletic performance especially over the last 10-20 years has been almost exponential. I wasn't talking about the offside rule either I was talking about just any space to collect the ball -- if you watch a game today, at least at the top level, it's plainly obvious how little of time each player has on the ball to make decisions especially in midfield or up front. In the past a guy like Maradona could get the ball in midfield (one of the best players in history, mind) and who would be there? It seemed he had all the time in the world to decide what he wanted to do (relative). You don't see that with guys like Messi, Ronaldo, Hazard, etc. Generally speaking if they are getting the ball players are closing them down almost instantly and often more than one.  

Curtinho wrote:
I don't really think it's fair to use that goal necessarily as an example, but even if you are had someone like Maradona or R9 done something like that in the past people wouldn't be using it as a slating of the defence but to prop him up for his brilliance. That was a very nice goal by Hazard in all fairness. But that's also the difference in today and in the past on how most people view players and media, IMO.

For me it's more than just being better technically; I think that with the speed of the game in general being so much faster because of the massive difference in athleticism and training it's much harder to stand out on a technical level because you have so much less time to show that ability. I don't think that the structure and training make poor technical players look better than they are I just think that it seems like players are more poor technically because they have to make faster decisions and have less time on the ball and thus aren't going to have the same kind of space and time needed -- for example even Henderson gets rave reviews about his technical ability in training, and outshone Suarez among others but where do you ever see that in a game? Maybe once in a blue moon? Part of the problem with the speed of the game increasing, and the structure and intensity is that it somewhat stifles individuality and creativity in some ways. You can see it maybe a bit more drastically with hockey.

I also don't really agree with the superteam thing making it balanced but that's a much longer post and I'll get to that eventually.

.

@Curtinho I went into detail comparing across eras in this thread after we talked about it

http://www.goallegacy.net/t40325-is-it-easier-to-be-an-attacker-today-than-in-the-past

Have a look.

Curtinho wrote:

I disagree a bit about tactics as well. I think tactical preparation can improve especially with all the information available now versus the past. I mean, you can analyze almost everything that happens in the match down to every touch by the opposition these days with different camera angles, you have so much data, information, video and staff. Training is more intense, better structured, with individual coaches for more and more things, better athletes, more money invested, etc. Teams adjust more quickly which means managers have to be more pragmatic and dynamic in their applications of formations/tactics/philosophy etc.

I agree that match preparations have gone up another level in terms of analysis, perhaps you can say that smallers teams are more prepared to deal witgh big players, but this has made very little teams as I said before, the collection of talent in one team forming super teams supplants any scouting you will do and teams are now a lot more attacking now than they were, so while they are more prepared to face the oppositon than before, they attack far more than before. Constructing attacks is harder than defendning, so if you have poorer players relative to their past counterparts as top talent is spread out far less, it more than makes up for any scouting you might know before hand. Football is more geared towards attacking now than ever. In fact I would say van Basten suggesting abolishing the offside is only a natural progression

So if you have more time to prepare but you have less aggregate talent to prepare for games and you are also attacking more, it means that you will drop points a lot more. Since Pepcelona Madrid and Barcelona get almost 90+ points every season. Bayern dominate the bundesliga and have the top 3 most points since they won the treble.

Curtinho wrote:As far as Ronaldo goes though again, he takes maybe 2 shots more a game than someone like Messi (this season only half a shot more) guys like Aguero, Ibra, etc. all take a lot of shots too. One thing that is worth noting is that Ronaldo is also a master of finding space to shoot, or getting into open spaces and drifting into scoring positions. It's a very underrated part of his game. As another poster mentioned I don't think that people respect the different facets of football enough at times and just view players that are good on the ball, who can dribble a lot or make perfect passes at a very high rate as being the epitome of football. There's so much more to the game than that, IMO, and I think that Cristiano excels in many areas that aren't as obvious in terms of flash and excitement. Why does he score so many 'tap ins'? Why is he always getting off so many shots? How is it that despite his so called selfishness he creates nearly as many chances for his teammates to score as Messi does (1.8 key passes game vs. 2.2 for Messi)? Since 2009 they've both played 350 games, Ronaldo has 361 goals and 106 assist and Messi has 157 goals and 127 assists. 21 more assists over 350 games doesn't seem like a massive difference and that's a fairly large sample size (keep in mind too, that Ronaldo has become more selfish and less dynamic over time). Stats obviously don't tell the whole story but despite the shooting inefficiency he is an incredibly efficient player at creating goals which is the hardest and most important thing in soccer.

For me Ronaldo's peak, as I said, was from 06-12 (and that's a very long peak). I think he did more, he was less stiff and more flexible as a player and contributed more overall. That said his consistency is still undeniable and remarkable and even as essentially a wide poacher he does more than he is given credit for.

I hope all that made sense.

Come on man. Comparing Messi and Ronaldo's "key passes" or assists to indicate they are close in creativity is disingenuous. I don't take key passes seriously as it's just a shot after a pass. Look at the difficulty of the passes they execute. Messi plays deeper and has to break blocks with his passing whereas most of Ronaldos assists are square passes and crosses. They are incomparable when it comes to passing. Also Madrid play on the counter with CR being the furthert player up front so he usually in the best position to assist whereas Messi plays mostly through blocks. Ronaldo is ineffecient and was ineffecient in his finishing at United. Not only that, his 'level' dips when he faces top teams. How many times have I heard the "Ronaldo had a poor game but he scored"? Too many times. That is usually the theme over the last 3/4 seasons and then people just look at his stats and forget and say he's the best in the world. I will say that CR can be serviced in more variety of ways and is arguably the best aerial player in history, up there with Santillana, Cahil, van Basten and Trezeguet technique wise but leap wise he is only matched by Santillana. He is an aerial monster.

At United anytime the lines tightened he looked poor. He was awful in all our big games in 07/08 Chelsea both legs, Liverpool both legs, Arsenal did nothing and was pocketed by Clichy, flopped against Barcelona, Bar the first half flopped against Chelsea in 2nd half and extra time then missed a penalty, season after he was terrible in the final. He has played in 4 champions league finals and has been terrible in all of them bar the first half in the 07/08. In his prime if you could match him for pace, he was easy to stop or if you sat deep he contributed very little. I respect the level he has sustained but as I said, as a football player he is simply not at the level of R9. R9 was better against blocks, had a far superior acceleration, better first touch, better finisher, better passer, better dribbler, better at turning players when he has his back to goal, something Ronaldo is poor at which is why he is a terrible centre forward. As for saying he scored 42 goals as a winger, Ronaldo played as a forward in 07/08 and played more as a winger in the previous and next season. Wingers go to the byline and cross and provide width, something Ronaldo doesn't do bar maybe a few instances in the last 2 games Madrid played (not las palmas). He has not been anything resembling a winger since 06/07. When he was at his mazing best, he never approached the level or abilities of Messi or R9, now he is an inefficient finisher and takes the most shots in Europe every season.

Overall, I would take the R9 that was at PSV - Inter in the first year and a half to any iteration of CR, but I would take CR at Madrid over R9 simply because he would give you more years.

Peak R9 > CR 06-12 > CR 13-now ~/> R9 at Madrid

Kommanding interview

Madeira Airport has officially been renamed as the 'Cristiano Ronaldo Airport'

when your crush laughs at a funny joke you made pic.twitter.com/13T2dzN73b

— David Wyllie (@journodave) March 29, 2017

What a shitty statue lmao

How did that statue get approved