Better Player? Ronaldinho or Ronaldo

Better Player?


  • Total voters
    30

S E P H

Cloud IX
Mar 5, 2010
30,714
16,240
Toruń, PL
Ronaldinho flashier, Ronaldo more effective player.
Not sure I agree, Ronaldo was a better dribbler and had some bulldog bite to his game, but Ronaldinho was more creative if that makes sense. Not only that, but Ronaldinho had better finishing skills and was more pacy/faster of the two. That's why you choose him if you're an expansion team and why he's the better player.
 

robertmac43

Forever 43!
Mar 31, 2015
23,095
15,176
For me Ronaldinho represents the creative and fun nature of football, watching him brings me joy. This being said I think Ronaldo is the guy that will bring you more results as he is a more direct and effective player.
 

Wee Baby Seamus

Yo, Goober, where's the meat?
Mar 15, 2011
14,704
5,715
Halifax/Toronto
Not sure I agree, Ronaldo was a better dribbler and had some bulldog bite to his game, but Ronaldinho was more creative if that makes sense. Not only that, but Ronaldinho had better finishing skills and was more pacy/faster of the two. That's why you choose him if you're an expansion team and why he's the better player.

Lmao wat
 

S E P H

Cloud IX
Mar 5, 2010
30,714
16,240
Toruń, PL
Ronaldo : pace, finishing, strong as a bull
Ronaldinho : flash, dribbling, creativity
No, I don't think so, I think both had similar strengths, but were more pronounced at different categories of those strengths. As I mentioned, I think Ronaldo is a better dribbler of the ball, but Ronaldoinho was more crafty and creative with his dribbling. Ronaldo and Inho both had superb speed, but Inho was easily the faster player. What it comes down to is that Ronaldo had more bulldog bite to his game, while Inho was flashier and better technical skills, thus why he's a better player for me. While on the other hand it could explain why people view Ronaldo as a more effective player.

Essentially,

- Ronaldo went down the middle of the pitch conducting tactics like in the movie 300
- Ronaldoinho started off from the flanks and used this elusivenss/creativity to get into the box

If we compare the two this way, Inho has more talent and why he's the better player.
 
Last edited:

YNWA14

Onbreekbaar
Dec 29, 2010
34,543
2,560
While I'd argue Ronaldinho's talent against anyone your descriptions of the two are a bit weird.

Either way 'dinho over anyone for me in terms of my preference, and I think he's at a bit of a disadvantage in this discussion because he didn't play as far forward, but Ronaldo's peak is right up there also. I do think people romanticize things a lot so it's always difficult to have these discussions (as I do with Ronaldinho).
 

Deficient Mode

Registered User
Mar 25, 2011
60,348
2,397
No, I don't think so, I think both had similar strengths, but were more pronounced at different categories of those strengths. As I mentioned, I think Ronaldo is a better dribbler of the ball, but Ronaldoinho was more crafty and creative with his dribbling. Ronaldo and Inho both had superb speed, but Inho was easily the faster player. What it comes down to is that Ronaldo had more bulldog bite to his game, while Inho was flashier and better technical skills, thus why he's a better player for me. While on the other hand it could explain why people view Ronaldo as a more effective player.

Essentially,

- Ronaldo went down the middle of the pitch conducting tactics like in the movie 300
- Ronaldoinho started off from the flanks and used this elusivenss/creativity to get into the box

If we compare the two this way, Inho has more talent and why he's the better player.

Ronaldo was impeccable technically though. You may find Dinho's dribbling style more visually pleasing, but it wasn't really more effective or better, just trickier and more deceptive since he dribbled more by moving the ball in unexpected ways (his use of the elastico is a good example, but there are others) whereas Ronaldo dribbled more with body and leg feints, instead of by moving the ball.

I don't think there is another prominent footballer who was easily faster than Ronaldo either. Did you see the video LITN posted of him hitting 36 km/hr with a barrel-sized gut in his 30s? That's what I find most unbelievable about your argument.
 

Cassano

Registered User
Aug 31, 2013
25,610
3,818
GTA
R9 didn't win the CL... How come he doesn't get criticized as much as Messi for not winning WC( which is tougher to win might I add)?
 

YNWA14

Onbreekbaar
Dec 29, 2010
34,543
2,560
I think they were probably comparable in speed. I think people forget how quick Ronaldinho was because he's known more for his joga bonito.
 

cgf

FireBednarsSuccessor
Oct 15, 2010
59,988
19,060
w/ Renly's Peach
Not sure I agree, Ronaldo was a better dribbler and had some bulldog bite to his game, but Ronaldinho was more creative if that makes sense. Not only that, but Ronaldinho had better finishing skills and was more pacy/faster of the two. That's why you choose him if you're an expansion team and why he's the better player.

wut?
 

cgf

FireBednarsSuccessor
Oct 15, 2010
59,988
19,060
w/ Renly's Peach
No, I don't think so, I think both had similar strengths, but were more pronounced at different categories of those strengths. As I mentioned, I think Ronaldo is a better dribbler of the ball, but Ronaldoinho was more crafty and creative with his dribbling. Ronaldo and Inho both had superb speed, but Inho was easily the faster player. What it comes down to is that Ronaldo had more bulldog bite to his game, while Inho was flashier and better technical skills, thus why he's a better player for me. While on the other hand it could explain why people view Ronaldo as a more effective player.

Essentially,

- Ronaldo went down the middle of the pitch conducting tactics like in the movie 300
- Ronaldoinho started off from the flanks and used this elusivenss/creativity to get into the box

If we compare the two this way, Inho has more talent and why he's the better player.

Based on this post, I am pretty confident that you didn't watch young Ronaldo.
 

John Pedro

Registered User
Feb 6, 2014
6,645
2,430
São Paulo
R9 didn't win the CL... How come he doesn't get criticized as much as Messi for not winning WC( which is tougher to win might I add)?

Because Ronaldo is a comeback story. He won a World Cup after two devasting injuries that could've ended his career. Ronaldinho also never had the same success with the NT as he did with Barça. Rivaldo used to be way better than him for NT.
 

YNWA14

Onbreekbaar
Dec 29, 2010
34,543
2,560
Because Ronaldo is a comeback story. He won a World Cup after two devasting injuries that could've ended his career. Ronaldinho also never had the same success with the NT as he did with Barça. Rivaldo used to be way better than him for NT.
Seems a bit of revisionist history after '06. He won the Golden ball in the 1999 confederations cup, was captain of the 2005 team that won (and was MotM in the final against Argentina) and was fantastic in the 2002 WC. The problem with Ronaldinho is that you don't get as big a sample size at the NT level and unfortunately he wasn't as dedicated to football as he could have been (his extracurriculars are quite well documented).
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->