Ronaldo, Xavi and Iniesta

[JamieD 18,989]

Club achievements don't make a player.

Sure, if you play for Southampton or something.

[Broxi 11,505]

I don't think Casillas is the best keeper in the world either and I don't think he's the keeper he once was, but I think over his career he has been in the handful of the greatest who ever played the game. I don't think that's true of Ronaldo, at all. Greatness is about more than stats. It's about more than talent, even. Iker Casillas won everything there is to win in the game. He captained his country to a European Championship and a World Cup before he even turned 30. It doesn't matter very much to me that Ronaldo smashed in the goals against Atletico Madrid tonight because there was only one true great of the game on the pitch, and that was his goalkeeper.

I, personally don't rate a players footballing ability on what they have won though. Casillas is the most successful player at Real Madrid, but not the best IMO.

[the goal machine 7,805]

It depends how you measure effectiveness though. Not that I had Ozil in mind when I said that, but to take your example, Ozil has created more goals for Ronaldo than anyone else at Real. He is not perfect and has tended to fade out of big games but he is enormously talented, younger and shows flashes of a kind of genius that Ronaldo doesn't possess, for all his physical prowess. On the other hand, Ronaldo is the one who actually puts the ball in the net, and he does it so often that it goes from being something that even David Healy does occasionally to "OH MY GOD SO IMPRESSIVE" because it's done relentlessly. But Ronaldo is not the greatest goal-scorer of all time. Gerd Muller scored more goals than Ronaldo, and he scored them in every game. He scored them in world cups galore. Very few people put Gerd Muller in the Pele/Maradona tier, so why the hell should we put Ronaldo in there? He's going to have to do a lot more than put balls in nets.

It's not as if he's a complete poacher. Two of his goals tonight were fantastic strikes and he's also started to get more assists. And he isn't playing up front usually. His transformation from an inconsistent, tricky winger to the Ronaldo he is now is almost unbelievable. Muller does deserve to be included as does Di Stefano imo so it's not as if I've argued against that. His career is still at quite an early stage as well, he still has a lot more to achieve. As does Messi.

[King Jela 20,371]

The arguments against Messi, on here, are filled with them. It's only natural.

Are they ? I've not seen a great deal of them.

[Goianegra 4,682]

Sure, if you play for Southampton or something.

Paul Lambert has a Champions League medal. Doesn't make him a great player.

[Broxi 11,505]

It's not as if he's a complete poacher. Two of his goals tonight were fantastic strikes and he's also started to get more assists. And he isn't playing up front usually. His transformation from an inconsistent, tricky winger to the Ronaldo he is now is almost unbelievable. Muller does deserve to be included as does Di Stefano imo so it's not as if I've argued against that. His career is still at quite an early stage as well, he still has a lot more to achieve. As does Messi.

I think the reason that Di Stefano isn't considered is because few people are alive who saw him play.

[ScottBF2 3,540]

Are they ? I've not seen a great deal of them.

Yes. It's the main criticism. That, along with his Argentina role.

[the goal machine 7,805]

I think the reason that Di Stefano isn't considered is because few people are alive who saw him play.

His legacy still lives on though. Even players like Puskas can be considered. Such a subjective issue.

[JamieD 18,989]

I, personally don't rate a players footballing ability on what they have won though. Casillas is the most successful player at Real Madrid, but not the best IMO.

But when you're talking about "greatest of all time", what else is there to go on? Talent alone is too vague, fleeting, not to mention too subjective to be any kind of meaningful measure. If you're not going to place some kind of emphasis on their impact on the game, you might as well put Matt Le Tissier in the top tier because he has a better highlights reel than anyone else. In the annals of football history, Iker Casillas is a greater figure than Ronaldo. It scarcely matters, I think, that Ronaldo is more spectacular at what he does than Casillas is at what he does now.

[JamieD 18,989]

Paul Lambert has a Champions League medal. Doesn't make him a great player.

ok?

[blueboy94 54]

It's a shame that due to Messi and Ronaldo's goalscoring Xavi and Inestia have almost been overlooked in the debate for 'greatest players in football history' The touch and passing ability both have is exceptional.

[King Jela 20,371]

Yes. It's the main criticism. That, along with his Argentina role.

His performances for Argentina are brought up far more than the "he needs Xavi and Iniesta" talk, certainly from what I've seen.

[Broxi 11,505]

But when you're talking about "greatest of all time", what else is there to go on? Talent alone is too vague, fleeting, not to mention too subjective to be any kind of meaningful measure. If you're not going to place some kind of emphasis on their impact on the game, you might as well put Matt Le Tissier in the top tier because he has a better highlights reel than anyone else. In the annals of football history, Iker Casillas is a greater figure than Ronaldo. It scarcely matters, I think, that Ronaldo is more spectacular at what he does than Casillas is at what he does now.

I still disagree that this, specifically, means that Casillas is a better player than Ronaldo.

[Goianegra 4,682]

ok?

You're saying Casillas is so good because of his winners medals? He's a "true great" because of it? Does that mean Messi isn't one because he hasn't won a World Cup?

[Creampuff 22,628]

Sure, if you play for Southampton or something.

That Andre Blackman's a smashing player, eh?

[JamieD 18,989]

I still disagree that this, specifically, means that Casillas is a better player than Ronaldo.

Would you like me to edit my initial post and replace "best" with "greatest"?

The discussion we were having was regarding all-time stature within the game. It's pretty obvious what I was talking about.

[Broxi 11,505]

You're saying Casillas is so good because of his winners medals? He's a "true great" because of it? Does that mean Messi isn't one because he hasn't won a World Cup?

If Messi was a die hard Osasuna fan (I know, shit example) and only wanted to play for them at mid table of La Liga then it wouldn't make him a worse player than what he is.

[ScottBF2 3,540]

You're saying Casillas is so good because of his winners medals? He's a "true great" because of it? Does that mean Messi isn't one because he hasn't won a World Cup?

I don't think he's debating talent. Messi isn't a true great right now either.

[JamieD 18,989]

You're saying Casillas is so good because of his winners medals? He's a "true great" because of it? Does that mean Messi isn't one because he hasn't won a World Cup?

You have... watched Casillas though? You are aware that he's a great goalkeeper regardless of what he has won? You are aware, surely, that the Paul Lambert analogy was utterly inane?

[Ricky_ 893]

Ronaldo has all the attributes to go down as the best player to ever play the game.

he will outlast Messi - i'd stake my fucking house on it.

Xavi & Pep guardiola won't be around forever, the sickeningly good football barca play, dominating teams like they are pub teams with 70%+ possession nearly every game and a chance creation rate like no other, won't last forever. The current Barca side & Messi go hand-in-hand.

Ronaldo on the other hand, he will do it in any side he plays in, wether thats Madrid, Man u, Man city, or perhaps in italy, he'll dominate, e'll score freekicks, headers, tap-ins, 40-yarders, he's got the lot. and he hasnt even peaked yet, he's been playing more like the ronaldo who dominated the premier league in the last 3 weeks, looks like hes finally found the magic in his long distance shooting again.

[JamieD 18,989]

That Andre Blackman's a smashing player, eh?

The new Maldini

[Broxi 11,505]

Would you like me to edit my initial post and replace "best" with "greatest"?

The discussion we were having was regarding all-time stature within the game. It's pretty obvious what I was talking about.

Maybe what you were talking about but not what we are debating. What we are debating is who is the best/most gifted player ever. Not who has won the most.

[Broxi 11,505]

he will outlast Messi - it stake my fucking house on it.

Xavi & Pep guardialo won't be around forever, the sickeningly good football barca play, dominating teams like they are pub teams with 70%+ possession nearly every game and a chance creation rate like no other, won't last forever. The current Barca side & Messi go hand-in-hand.

Ronaldo on the other hand, he will do it in any side he plays in, wether thats Madrid, Man u, Man city, or perhaps in italy, he'll dominate, e'll score freekicks, headers, tap-ins, 40-yarders, he's got the lot. and he hasnt even peaked yet, he's been playing more like the ronaldo who dominated the premier league in the last 3 weeks, looks like hes finally found the magic in his long distance shooting again.

Like I said in a previous post, it isn't as if all Messi's goals are tap in after Xavi or Iniesta do all the work. Messi creates a lot of his own goals too.

[JamieD 18,989]

Maybe what you were talking about but not what we are debating. What we are debating is who is the best/most gifted player ever. Not who has won the most.

You asked in your own first post whether the three players in your thread title are among "the greatest players in history". I thought it acceptable to discuss it because you asked us to

My argument has nothing to do with who has won the most. It's not about trophies alone. That is completely self-evident. Plenty of shite players have winner's medals. But it's clearly not about talent alone either. None of the players who are consistently mentioned as among "the greatest of all time" are in that company on talent alone. The reason Maradona is considered the greatest of all-time is that he did something superhuman in 1986. He didn't win very much at club level in comparison with some, but he ascended to greatness in a way that nobody has ever matched. It is very possible (not certain, but possible) that more talented players than Maradona have lived and died, but no player can reasonably be placed above him, not because of what he could do but because of what he did.

[Ricky_ 893]

Like I said in a previous post, it isn't as if all Messi's goals are tap in after Xavi or Iniesta do all the work. Messi creates a lot of his own goals too.

im not saying his entire game is based upon the form of 2 players - far from it.

and dont get me wrong, i think messi is an unbelievable player - but his performances with Argentina are more a level playing field, hes involved in game that are 50/50, hes out his comfort zone of playing in a team that owns the football for over 2/3rds of the entire game - and hes not scored a single goal in the last 2 major tournaments for Argentina. If Barca swapped Messi for Ronaldo, it would be rather 1 sided.