Ronaldo is retiring

[Cumbrian]

@These are my own pants

Romario was good, but for me no question that Ronaldo was better. Ronaldo at his peak,it’s diffciul;t to describe how good he was and how there was really no question that he was the best player in the World. Despite the fact that circa 1994 Romario was the best player in the World he still didn’t quite acheive the same level as Ronaldo.

I don’t think I would dispute this - in terms of *all round *ability, Ronaldo was the better player (though not one of the Top 10 all time in my opinion for the reasons I outline in my original post - I’m more prone to favouring the players that shape the game rather than score the goals). If you asked me to pick the player most likely to pick the ball up on the half way line - round three players, hold off a 4th trying to kick hell out him and still score, Ronaldo at the peak of his powers would be it (or certainly top 3).

But, if the question was - there is a one on one with keeper and the player you pick must score or you will be shot dead - I would pick Romario over Ronaldo every time. In my opinion, he was a better pure finisher. Hence my contention, that there is debate over whether Ronaldo is the best striker - particularly given the cast of players Romario played with versus those who supported Ronaldo for much of his career. The strikers job is to put the ball in the net. Not to put too fine a point on it - but Wagner Love would have scored lots of goals for Brazil if he was getting the ball from Rivaldo and Ronaldinho.

This is a debate that cannot be settled - and the degrees of difference are so fine in their respective finishing ability - but if the job is putting the ball in the back of the net, I’d want Romario. If I want someone who worries the bejeesus out of the opposition and causes problems further from goal, then it’s probably Ronaldo.

[bucketybuck]

@Cumbrian

All the stats quoted above don’t take into account the quality of the oppostion, nor the quality of the player that was supplying the bullets for him…(snip)

…34 in 46 for Barcelona (when the talent pool of players was more spread both within Spain and within Europe)

Now now, Gheorghe Hagi and Hristo Stoichkov werent too bad at supplying a few bullets…

[Snarky_Kong]

@These are my own pants

Obviously Bayern were European Champions multiple times when Muller was there, but you have to also be aware of the context that he played in the years immediately following the formation of a national professional German domestic league. A higher goal averegae was much harder to obtain in English football at the time that Greave played because he was playing in a more balanced league of experinced professionals. Greaves’s stats are phenoumenal in the context of where and when he was playing. By the time that English teams started to take the European Cup seriously Greaves career was already starting to wind down.

I would say Muller was better than Greaves, but not by anyweher near as much as you think.

Muller scored 68 goals in 62 internationals. Greaves scored 44 in 57. Same confederation, same competition, and Muller crushes Greaves in that category. Muller scored 14 WC goals and 4 European Championship goals. Greaves scored 1 World Cup goal and none in the European Championship.

Goals per game in England and Germany during both tenures were 3.19 and 3.49 respectively. 3.13 and 3.36 if you discount the goals Greaves and Muller scored. The German league had 10% more goals but Muller’s strike rate was 50% higher.

Even if defenses were horrible in the German league(which they weren’t, comparatively), Muller was far far better on every other stage as well.

[Aji_de_Gallina]

Ronaldo is best #9 I’ve ever seen playing. He would go through defenses like a steamroller.
It’s sad to see him gone and we’ll always wonder how much better he would’ve been without the inuries and the hipothiroidism.