Cristiano Ronaldo: Los Blancos' Future Rests on Retaining Star Striker
Real Madrid would be stupid to let Cristiano Ronaldo walk away because of an unwillingness to pony up the necessary cash to keep their star player.
The Portuguese international has continued to impress this season, solidifying his position as one of the world’s best footballers.
So what’s there to discuss?
Uncertainty within the Bernabeu has left Ronaldo’s future up in the air. Will the team cater to his demands or shed his heavy salary and retool during the summer in an attempt to come back strong next season?
Ronaldo made his intentions perfectly clear. Not only is he competing with Barcelona’s Lionel Messi for FIFA’s Ballon d’Or Crown, he’s also looking for similar treatment in his bank account.
The Portuguese winger intends to depart in the summer of 2013 unless he gets similar attention to his contract like Messi did in mid-December, according to Spanish newspaper Marca (via DailyMail.co.Uk).
Letting a player like Ronaldo walk because of financial reasons isn’t going to fly with a fanbase that is already up in arms over the decline in play from their Blancos this season.
Los Blancos have found themselves in third place in the La Liga table, trailing Barca by a considerable margin.
They also washed out of the Champions League early, a first for a defending club.
However, it hasn’t been due to anything Ronaldo has or hasn’t done. The star winger has been phenomenal on the pitch no matter how tough the competition.
He is right there in the discussion for FIFA’s best player. It isn’t just because of his name, either. He is bringing it match in and match out, playing consistently at the high level we have come to expect from him.
Without Ronaldo, Los Blancos would not recover as quickly as many would like to think. His explosiveness and efficiency on the pitch is second to none.
Well, to anyone other than Messi.
And even that’s debatable.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?