Portugal drew 1-1 with DR Congo in their opening match of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, and the biggest talking point wasn’t the result. It was the 41-year-old striker who stayed on the pitch for the full duration despite contributing almost nothing to the attack.
Roberto Martínez, Portugal’s head coach, used his post-match press conference to mount a defense of his decision to keep Cristiano Ronaldo on the field. His reasoning was straightforward, if circular: the team needed goals, and Ronaldo is the greatest goal scorer in international football history. Therefore, Ronaldo stays.
“It made no sense at all to take off Cristiano Ronaldo, who is the best scorer in history, off the field when we were looking for goals.”
A ten-match goal drought at major tournaments is the kind of statistic that would get most strikers benched. For Ronaldo, it apparently gets you a full 90 minutes and a coach who speaks about you like you just scored a hat trick.
Critics were not gentle. BBC commentator Chris Sutton suggested that Martínez appeared “scared” to substitute Ronaldo. The word “embarrassing” was also thrown around by various pundits assessing Portugal’s performance.
Martínez went a step further in the press conference, floating the idea that Ronaldo could still be playing at the 2030 World Cup, citing the forward’s sustained motivation and physical discipline. That would make Ronaldo 45 years old by the time that tournament kicks off.
The 2030 comment is revealing because it signals that Martínez has no intention of initiating a transition away from Ronaldo. The decision, it seems, will be Ronaldo’s to make on his own terms.
The most telling detail from the press conference wasn’t what Martínez said. It was what he didn’t say. There was no acknowledgment that Ronaldo’s performance was below standard. No suggestion that rotation might be considered. No hint that the ten-match drought was a cause for concern. Just unwavering faith in a player whose greatest achievements are increasingly measured in past tense.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

1 hour ago
17









English (US) ·