40s Retro Football Fantasy Draft | Finished

Gol123 said:


What a goal this is.

@RedTiger
Depends on the player really. Most of the top ones are gone now, though.
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing that humdinger. I think the beauty of this draft will be in uncovering some of the previously unearthed gems.
 
Skizzo said:
I think anto asked for a temp ban? Could be wrong though.

id say we both have equal control. We both partake in the match threads, and will sometimes switch off on the write ups etc, but it's really just a joint effort. We check ideas with each other on players, tactics etc.



That's fine. It's better that someone after you would take.
Click to expand...
I don't think I could work like that. I have pretty much gone against all of Stains recommendations for first picking players. That takes a lot of mutual trust that I don't really have.

Gio said:
Thanks for sharing that humdinger. I think the beauty of this draft will be in uncovering some of the previously unearthed gems.
Click to expand...
I know. Probably the great thing about this draft is researching all of these players and watching old videos of them all. My knowledge has gone up tenfold on football in the 60's.
 
Anyone willing to select the #3 bugger for me? Might not make it in time for that round, and the game manager (?) is offline right now..
 
Invictus said:
Anyone willing to select the #3 bugger for me? Might not make it in time for that round, and the game manager (?) is offline right now..
Click to expand...

You mean actually select the bugger? Why don't you PM someone a short list - including a keeper, and perhaps a player or two you can bench eventually.

But if you're pressed for time and need someone to actually choose a player for you - I'd recommend a neutral for that.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
Thank ye, sir.

I wasn't sure about picking him, as there's a distinct chance of missing out here on certain players, in certain positions, beyond whom the pool contains very little in terms of names you can expect to sell without too much hassle.

But feck it - I never wanted to use Pelé as the main striker (even though I easily could have), but rather have someone else - a pure finisher - play in front of him, allowing him to sit deeper. So, rather than waiting and digging up some half plausible man who would work in that role, I went with the Rolls Royce choice instead - knowing well, of course, this means I have to settle for some non-Rolls players further down the pitch. That's fine, though - I'm going offensive this time around, no question about that, really.
Click to expand...

They don't come as better finishers than Greaves so well played. Not that he's not an all-round threat but his finishing was just top class.
 
Have to admit I'm rather keen on seeing who Aldo goes for here. Two on the trot too. What he does might influence my further route rather heavily.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
Thank ye, sir.

I wasn't sure about picking him, as there's a distinct chance of missing out here on certain players, in certain positions, beyond whom the pool contains very little in terms of names you can expect to sell without too much hassle.

But feck it - I never wanted to use Pelé as the main striker (even though I easily could have), but rather have someone else - a pure finisher - play in front of him, allowing him to sit deeper. So, rather than waiting and digging up some half plausible man who would work in that role, I went with the Rolls Royce choice instead - knowing well, of course, this means I have to settle for some non-Rolls players further down the pitch. That's fine, though - I'm going offensive this time around, no question about that, really.
Click to expand...
You just need to build the teams around your attack now. Everyone picked to get the best out of those 2. What a bloody attack you have!
 
green_smiley said:
It would be a waste to use Pele as main striker. He is so much more
Click to expand...

Quite so. I'd never have even contemplated playing him up front, simply, with someone else pulling the strings behind - so by "main striker" I was thinking more of the possibility of going with a modern style 4-3-3 of sorts - Pelé in the middle as more of a false nine, flanked by a couple of wingers/wide forwards, that sort of deal. He'd easily shine in that role too.

Not that he wouldn't shine as a pure striker - but as you rightly say, it would be something of a waste.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
According to the Internet it's...01:13 GMT/UTC. Sticking to that zone/time I posted my pick at 16:42. So unless I've gone insane (which is obviously possible), it's well past 8 hrs.
Click to expand...
EAP is actually correct. You posted at 1942 CEST yesterday. That +8h is 0342 today, which is in 20 minutes.
 
ctp said:
EAP is actually correct. You posted at 1942 CEST yesterday. That +8h is 0342 today.
Click to expand...

That's weird. What I get here is 1642UTC/1742BST - which should be 1842 CEST, not 1942. Maybe the browser is fecked up. Will check on Firefox too.
 
Hm. Firefox too insists the damn post was made at 16:42 UTC.

Maybe the computer is fecked. Or it could be aliens.

Anyway, let's just wait for a while and see if he shows up - I'm not in a rush, though it's getting pretty late here.
 
Ah, I figured it out: It's the Caf time zone setting which has been altered for some reason - it's an hour off. Mystery solved - and Aldo still has...five minutes.
 
Skizzo said:
Alrighty. How long would you want me to wait if he hasn't shown up by then?
Click to expand...

Good question.

You know what - I have 8hrs myself, technically, starting now. And I have to get up early, so I won't sleep for more than a couple of hours, really - meaning that I can just check back when I wake up, and if he STILL hasn't shown up, I'll just post the pick and we'll go from there.

@Aldo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.