Messi went from being compared with Ronaldo and Kaka to Haaland and Mbappe. Crazy that.
You must log in or register to comment.
THREE stats! Quite the nuanced dissection
Rodri clear
Haaland + 18 goals
Messi + 15 assists
Net goal contribution of Haaland is just merely 3 compared to Messi
Messi carried Argentina to the holy grail of the World Cup trophy at 36 years old
Without a doubt he deserved the Ballon D’or, how are people saying Haaland deserves it instead?
Man City has 5 players in the top 10 of the Ballon D’or, the team is stacked, winning the treble was a collective effort not solely relying on Haaland
Messi carried the Argentina team to the World Cup, a greater display of individuality, which is what the Ballon D’or celebrates, which is bullshit really, since football is a team sport.
But that’s another whole topic altogether.
Messi deservedly won the Ballon D’or over Haaland.
Too bad Man city didn’t win the community shield. That would definitely have sealed it for Haaland. Because that is how this works.
Reducing the argument to G/A is dumb. Messi impacts the game in other ways. So does Haaland. Also the difference in the quality.of the league and their national team.
Messi also had 149 chances created, with 44 big chances.
You cannot ignore this part.100% deserved more than any other player.
Messi went from being compared with Ronaldo and Kaka to Haaland and Mbappe. Crazy that.
More like Ronaldo went from being compared to Messi to being compared to no one.
I think he mens R9
Both are deserving winners but Messi has a better pr, halaand has many more years to win it. Cr7 would have been given the bdor also if he did what Messi did cause of their high pr as goats of the game
Erling did it in farmers league so obviously Messi won.
Håland should have won it easily but no
That’s an incredible number of goals but what this is an absolutely joyless (and ineffective) way to compare football players.
One is in Uber Eats and burger league, other is in the prem. I’m sure they there are high school players with better g/a, they should have won.
Haaland has the disadvantage of playing for a national team that does not qualify anywhere
If he cared enough about international trophies he’d switch his national team to England.
To be fair, he chose to represent Norway, he could have chosen England. So while a disadvantage, it’s a somewhat self imposed one. His real disadvantage is that the team he could have chosen, England, already has one of the world’s best strikers, Eddie Nketiah. Just kidding. But that’s why a lot of African nations get their players poached by European nations like France, Germany, Portugal, Belgium, and Switzerland, thus hamstringing their competitiveness. They’d rather be on teams for the fast track to success, than hampered because they’re one of maybe 2-3 good players,at that given time, on a mediocre team, like Norway.
True but that becomes less relevant in seasons without a big national tournament. It’s still logical that the world cup weights more than anything else.
Haaland’s part of a national team that just failed to qualify ahead of Scotland. Norway not making the euros is partly his fault, missing clear chances in games, and apart from a penalty against Scotland he was invisible
Haaland is such a boring and lifeless player in comparison to Messi