2 major attacking forces, who is better?

Roberto carlos, and by some distance tbh. Won more, scored more, faster, stronger, better shot, better set-piece taker, technically superior, a bigger legend, world cup winner, copa america winner. EASY. Lets just say Roberto carlos was a fantasy version of marcelo. R.carlos was a brand ffs. Lol

Bankz wrote:Roberto carlos, and by some distance tbh. Won more, scored more, faster, stronger, better shot, better set-piece taker, technically superior, a bigger legend, world cup winner, copa america winner. EASY. Lets just say Roberto carlos was a fantasy version of marcelo. R.carlos was a brand ffs. Lol

The question is who's better lol . Anyways I'd go with Rob too. But the way people are quick to criticize players nowadays, Carlos would have gotten his fair share of critics too.

Marcelo better technically no doubt. RC better at everything else and was plenty technical for his position.

RC bludgeoned you all game long. He wasn't a great defender... but he worked his arse off to play defense regardless and did well enough. You could get past him on defense but you were going to have to earn it and pay a price. Had a 3rd lung and worked tirelessly.

Had a couple of brainfarts on NT at bad times, which detracted from his otherwise superb performances there.... i.e. shoelaces against France and the missed overhead clearance against the Netherlands I think (could be wrong).

rincon wrote:Marcelo isn't the best fullback on his current team, comparing him to all time greats is too much.

As someone who stalks watches Madrid week in week out i can say yes he is and arguably the best in world right now. Carvajal is more complete but what marcello offers in attack is just immense to this team.

Yeah I mean you have to separate attack and defense. Fullback and midfielders are the only players who need to do both... so you can't just rate them one way and completely ignore the other side.

Because we lack attacking creativity in the midfield, Marcelo is extremely important to this team. If we didn't need that aspect as much (as when we had Ozil and Di Maria), then his lack of balance gets exposed.

sportsczy wrote:Marcelo better technically no doubt.  RC better at everything else and was plenty technical for his position.

RC bludgeoned you all game long.  He wasn't a great defender...  but he worked his arse off to play defense regardless and did well enough.  You could get past him on defense but you were going to have to earn it and pay a price.  Had a 3rd lung and worked tirelessly.

Had a couple of brainfarts on NT at bad times, which detracted from his otherwise superb performances there.... i.e. shoelaces against France and the missed overhead clearance against the Netherlands I think (could be wrong).

I'm disappointed in you

It was against Denmark. Our greatest ever NT. Almost had that game...

Well. Our 84 team was also amazing.

LOL come back to me when RC can dribble half as good as Marcelo...

Marcelo has surpassed him. Carlos was a 1 FK in 5 seaons merchant. Marcelo is better than him at everything bar recovery pace. He's better at defending one on ones, better at crossing, better at passing and is essentially a playmaker. Carlos is ovverated by people that get a hard on from watching his banana fk against France.

Finally

El Kommander wrote:Marcelo has surpassed him. Carlos was a 1 FK in 5 seaons merchant. Marcelo is better than him at everything bar recovery pace. He's better at defending one on ones, better at crossing, better at passing and is essentially a playmaker. Carlos is ovverated by people that get a hard on from watching his banana fk against France.

Roberto Carlos was a ballon dor caliber player, he was 2nd in 2002, should have been 1st. I love Marcelo and he is becoming a legend too, but Roberto carlos was a freak of nature, he was full back and winger at the same time with no help on the wing.