Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Ronaldo was very influential for United - and they will be transformed without him for better or worse. I don't think anyone is going to miss him departing these shores. United usually spend about ?50m each summer so that on top of the Ronaldo money makes a bumper ?130m transfer budget.
I was watching Time Of Our Lives on Sky that focused on Matt Busby 1960s team. Jeff Sterling opened it up with, United dominated the 60s ... shortly afterwards one of the ex-players from that period David Sadler groaned how that team, of Law and Chartlon, almost got relegated in 1962/63 season.
Love to see Ronaldo take a free kick with a sodden case ball from the sixties....or Charlton taking a free kick with a modern ball. Know it's a cliche but so much has changed. Ronaldo is immensely skillful but will be remembered by most people for all the wrong reasons. But only got himself to blame. Interesting to see reactions of ManU fans when he plays against them.

Ronaldo is a fantastic player who is ideally suited to the smash and grab athletic nature of the Premiership. It's when he faces quality opposition that he looks more ordinary. Put a quick, strong defender on Ronaldo and he is often quiet. I've no doubt someone like Rio Ferdinand would shut Ronaldo down. The difference between Ronaldo and likes of Messi / Kaka / Torres / Gerrard is that those guys really are unstoppable on the biggest stage.


It is difficult to truly judge Ronaldo against someone from the 50s, 60s, 70s as we've usually only got goal highlights to go on which gives the impression that every time George Best or Bobby Charlton put their foot on the ball it resulted in a mazy dribble and a block buster goal.


What I would say is that Ronaldo has been the most influential player for his team in the Premiership even more so than Henry was at Arsenal or Gerrard at Liverpool.

Best was also all over the press, front and back pages, and so became a bigger star, and will be remembered so. Beckham will also be remembered for years, whereas other great players, like Gerrard, Henry, *grits teeth* Lampard, Scholes, Giggs and so on, will be forgotten quite quickly after retirement.


The fans of their clubs will always remember them, but lets be honest, who really talks about Robbie Fowler, Macca, Rush, Cantona*, Bergkamp, Petit, Van Nistleroy, even the young Owen, who seems like light years ago.


Not suggesting Best wasn't great, but I do believe that a player who is in the press a lot will become hyped up and remembered as possibly greater than another player who just kept his head down and played.


* Obviously the films keep him in the spot light.

Annasfield Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Just depends on your generation I guess. Some

> people are lucky (or unlucky depending on your

> stance) to have seen both play.


Are you trying to say I'm an old codger Anna?


I have to say Ronaldo has a fine shot and stepover - but I think he has limited ability to run with the ball and beat players at speed, something GB had no problems with whatsoever. The first 60 seconds of this show Best do things that Ronaldo could only dream of.


The real reason Rafa wants more English players in the Liverpool team is because they get the summer off every year - whereas the Spanish lads will have played 4 years non stop by the time Liverpool lift the European Cup at Wembley in May 2011.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I never said that. Saying I don’t like some of the rhetoric coming from the left doesn’t mean I approve of Farage et al saying that Afghans being brought here to protect their lives and thank them for their service means there is an incalculable threat to women.    Anything to score a cheap point. It’s pretty pathetic. 
    • To be fair we are as hosed as the majority of other countries post-Covid. The problem is Labour promised way too much and leant in on the we need change and we will deliver it and it was clear to anyone with a modicum of sense that no change was going to happen quickly and actually taking the reigns may have been a massive poison- chalice. As Labour are finding to their cost - there are no easy answers.  A wealth tax seems straightforward but look how Labour have U-turned on elements of non-dom - why? Because the super rich started leaving the country in their droves and whilst we all may want them to pay more tax they already pay a big chunk already and the government saw there was a problem.
    • You don’t think there are right-wing politicians fanning this with rhetoric? Really? 
    • No party is willing to tackle the "elephant in the room" which is the national debt. It is costing the country circa £100 Billion ANNUALLY to service that debt. That is more than the defence and education budgets. That debt burden has to be reduced which in reality means cost cuts. That means cutting back state pensions, index-linked pensions for civil servants and others such as police, NHS etc. It means cutting back on universal credit and cutting the number of people who are claiming benefits.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...