The Two Statues

Every four years, the Portuguese nation finds itself in a state of ambivalence. We oscillate between the absolute certainty that the National Team will be world champions and the equally absolute conviction that we are neither favorites, nor contenders, nor anything at all. We live between the belief that only Luiz Felipe Scolari could have led Portugal to a European Championship final and a World Cup semi-final, and the idea that the Brazilian was merely a good psychologist and man-manager. Finally, the ambivalence of all ambivalences, the queen of all paradoxes: Cristiano Ronaldo. For some, he is the greatest of the greats, the GOAT of GOATs, the one who must always play because he is better than Gonçalo Ramos and Gonçalo Guedes, together or separately. For others, Ronaldo is old, doesn't run, doesn't move, doesn't defend, doesn't track back, and shouldn't even have been called up, let alone play 90 minutes after 90 minutes.

I always remember the first time I heard someone talk about bringing players (or, in this case, the Portuguese) back down to earth. One day, back in 2004 or 2005, I heard José Mourinho say something like this: if my players are euphoric, I have to temper their enthusiasm; if they are down, I have to lift their spirits. The secret, ultimately, is recentering. Or, as Anglophiles say, back to basics. A return to the essentials. But in football, as we well know, it's complicated to be rational. It's either black or white. Never grey. It's either tall or short. Never average. It's either fat or thin. No one ever has the right percentile. This is where the most frequently heard football phrase of recent years comes in, which, despite being true, is now too tedious due to its repetition: "We weren't the best in the world, nor are we the worst now." And it's true.

The current ambivalences have clear faces: Roberto Martínez and Cristiano Ronaldo. The ambivalence surrounding the national coach, however, is different: it almost always revolves around the worst extreme. Some say he is merely adequate, while others claim he is very poor. Few believe he is the right man for the job. He was deemed poor when Portugal drew with DR Congo, became adequate after the thrashing of Uzbekistan, and then dropped again after the draw with Colombia. Perhaps he will be considered adequate again if the National Team overcomes Croatia, and only moderately good if they beat Spain (or Austria, of course). It was like this with Fernando Santos before and after Euro 2016. In between, in France, he was excellent.

As for Ronaldo, the Portuguese strangely oscillate between love and hate for the captain. Hate when he misses goals like those against Congo and Colombia; love when he scores two brilliant goals like the ones against Uzbekistan. Perhaps in a few days, we will once again love what some now hate. And if Portugal wins their eighth game in this World Cup, those who now criticize him will shout GOAT!, GOAT!, GOAT! It has been this way every four years (2006, 2010, 2014, 2018, 2022, and 2026), or every two years, if we include the European Championships.

In my own ambivalence, I oscillate between, yes, the man can no longer always be a starter, and if not him, then who? What I won't accept is the aggression reaching the point of saying that Portugal, against DR Congo, played with ten men and a statue, as an English journalist wrote. I prefer to say almost the opposite. Portugal, against Colombia, played with eight men and two statues. But the statues that should be erected, in Miami, are for Diogo Costa and Renato Veiga.