50s Fantasy Draft - antohan v Gio
- Thread starter Brwned
- Start date
Antohan for me in this one. He done his homework and judged this one perfectly, IMO.
Had it not been for the changes he'd made and the argument he put forward for his reasons, then I think Gio would have won this convincingly because he has a great team but anto out maneuvered him here. Sorry Gio.
Had it not been for the changes he'd made and the argument he put forward for his reasons, then I think Gio would have won this convincingly because he has a great team but anto out maneuvered him here. Sorry Gio.
I can't see Antohan scoring in this game - not one player in his team has breached 20 goals in a season. He's also essentially deployed five players - the two centre-halves, sweeper and two deep-lying miidfielders - to deal with Platini and Elkjaer. Understandable enough and perhaps sufficient to hold for a 0-0, but it does leave control of the match firmly in Souness and Brady's capable hands.
Very close game for me, I won't decide just yet.
Re: goals. Simonsen may not have breached twenty in a season but he is the only player to have scored in a European Cup, UEFA Cup and Cup Winners Cup Final. In the big games, he has proved he can make the difference.
Season scoring stats are also deceptive, both of them were more concerned with creating and assisting as a main role and someone else racking up the goals that resulted. They will do that for each other here.
As pointed out previously, the moment Boniek left Juve Platini's top scoring form in Serie A came to a halt. How many of those were penos? Boniek drew the penalties, Platini scored from them, see Heysel 1985. I just can get someone else to do the shooting here, the important thing is to have the player that creates the havoc and draws the penatly, not the one who racks up the goal tally over the season by being the designated penalty taker.
Re: committing 5 players to 2. That's an odd way to look at it, particularly when I emphasised my desire to allow for Briegel and Gerets to be able to venture forward. Those 5 are also there to allow for that without being left short at the back.
Souness and Brady can pass from deep onto an outnumbered strike-force and all they would get is me recovering possession promptly. As and when they push forward, with Schuster tracking one of them, Falcao or Lerby pick the other up, leaving one DM for Platini and two CBs and the sweeper on Elkjaer AND picking up anyone who beats his man/loses his marker.
You would have to get past several layers and beat several players to get a breakthrough, and commit Souness and Brady forward in the process. All the better, I would have the entire pitch for Boniek, Simonsen, Schuster and Gerets/Briegel setting up a devastating counter.
As soon as this happens you're vulnerable to the long diagonal in behind - which Souness, Brady or any of my back four are capable of providing. Rep and Cha are the perfect players - pacey, direct with an eye for goal - to get behind advancing wing-backs.
When not moving forward, your wing-backs will be pushed right back into a deep line of five. That will play into the hands of long-shot experts like Nelinho, Souness, Brady or Platini to have pops from distance without compromising on our own defensive shape.
That's precisely why the three in the centre of defence are useful, as one can come out and cover for that diagonal ball while the fullback is away, still leaving two on Elkjaer. That's why I say the 5 are not there just to deal with two.
I agree, pops from distance are your only hope, if I give you the time and space to do them, which I'm bound to occasionally. That's where your one goal could come, as stated.
In camping on the edge of your own box, you're also bound to give up the occassional goalscoring opportunity. Conceding control of the midfield should give us 60-70% possession which will invariably lead to chances given the creative calibre of my players. Much like when teams park the bus against the likes of Barcelona, your defensive shape will limit the overall number of chances but there will still be enough for predators in the ilk of Platini, Elkjaer, Cha and Rep to bury. Ultimately you're relying on that central three to hold firm for 90 minutes under a barrage of threat - a big ask when that three isn't heavy on the generation-defining defensive talents that other teams possess.
Where am I conceding midfield control?
I'm just not going for a full-on central midfield battle. You could argue I have more midfielders on the pitch, either side of your main central midfielders.
As stated, either Souness and Brady drop deep to leave no room for Boniek and Simonsen to receive in acres of space, or they try to stop Falcao, Lerby and Schuster building up with two excellent wide options raring to join.
They can't be dealing with both threats at the same time. Either they let me have full control and the lion's share of possession or they chase the ball around like headless chicken, getting bypassed continuously.
This is exactly what I mean by your team not being ready for this game. You are still trying to work out what is happening while we've been drilling it all week.
Gio has gone quiet... 
Brwned, any feedback?
Here:
You need two men to deal with Platini's threat - that's understandable. Otherwise he'll help himself to the two-goals-per-game he enjoyed at Euro 84. In doing so however, Schuster is isolated against Brady and Souness.
My defence is comfortable playing a high line. Hansen is famous for his mastery of the offside trap, marshalling the Liverpool defence to conceding just 16 goals in 42 league games in 1978/79. Coelho too is cut from the same cloth - "Portuguese Beckenbaeur" - limiting Benfica to just 11 goals conceded in 1977/78 . Bossis is a rarity amongst full-backs, as adept at playing sweeper as he is out wide.
Meanwhile, both Boniek and Simonsen are most comfortable playing off a main striker. Neither will naturally lead the line to get the rest of your midfield into the game. With the defence pushed high, Brady and Souness can therefore retain positional discipline and dictate play to the point that Schuster, Boniek and Simonsen will be shagged after 30 minutes of ball-chasing. Never mind posing any threat in behind.
I explained that earlier. Brady and Souness have no decent passes on from deep, so they obviously need to charge, at which point Schuster is on one and one of the two on Platini picks up the other. There's still three defenders to go with only one man to look after, so even if Platini beats his marker he has to deal with either CB coming to pick him up and even the sweeper after.
That's when YOU have the ball. When I have the ball I can go all tiki-taka on you or go for the more direct counter if the opportunity is there.
How many times did they play the offside trap vs. such a pair?
Have a look at this Boniek top 10, many of them you will see are precisely when defences try the offside trap on him. The keepers reaction on the 5th is legendary, classic Italian.
Between 1:30 and 2:30 here you have a couple of offside trap attempts on Simonsen or defences letting him run at them. Witness the complete disarray he leaves them in (and boy did he have a good shot on him!).
They were both tireless players. Boniek's stamina and workrate was insane, he was like the Duracell bunny. I posted this yesterday but you may as well look at it again. Look at all the different places he pops up. In particular the third goal where he starts off the move as a right winger and finishes it beating the offside trap and rounding the keeper in a way the most proficient centreforwards would love to.
I focused on the so-called "barrage" earlier, but this is a point I'm interested in as well. What do you call generation-defining?
The Italians showed Brazil you needed to be able to defend properly in '82 and I guess it is them you mainly refer to as generation-defining. On the other hand, De León and Pereyra were the best CBs in the Brazilian league for a key half-decade (82-86) which was the turning point in Brazil's recent football history.
They were the role models, they are the ones idolised to this day by the fans of their respective clubs. They were the ones a new generation looked up to to learn how to defend without being a rubbish/limited player.
A generation later Brazil had won two World Cups based on their usual technical ability and awesome attackers, but built on a solid defensive foundation. Those two had a hand in that in a generation-defining way.
Two of the strongest sides in the draft. Not going to vote for a while!
Nothing particularly worth listening to I'm afraid, anto. Simply put I just went for what I thought was the better team. I don't have the same capacity/enthusiasm to analyse these games in minute detail the way you do!
Bummer. I was hoping there would be some. Cling Bak never gives any reason for his vote and I have no idea who the other chap is.
I've got precious little feedback from the entire group stage despite trying different formations, partly for tactical reasons, partly hoping something would come unstuck and prompt feedback.
As ever, I will probably find in the knockout rounds there is something fundamentally wrong with my team that suddenly everyone sees. Been there before...
Out of interest, do you reckon it was better to play it this way or leave out the sweeper and play Morena upfront?
I think it's because of the very reason I've given, anto. No-one else analyses it in such detail as you so all these relatively subtle tactical shifts don't make a whole lot of difference. The majority of people are just coming in here to have a look at the two teams on their own and decide which is best, with people looking at the overall balance of the sides and a few key battles, and that's it. They don't imagine it being played out on the pitch in the same way you do. So your reasoning for picking certain players, while sound, isn't in fitting with the reasoning used by the average voter and so even if your team was better suited to playing a certain way, against a certain team, if it looks worse on paper (perhaps with chemistry, balance taken into account, but not to the same detail) then you'll end up losing.
I think that's part of it. Part of it's probably just luck too. You've had one of the best teams every time, and the majority of people have said so each time. Just one of those things.
I think that's part of it. Part of it's probably just luck too. You've had one of the best teams every time, and the majority of people have said so each time. Just one of those things.
Yeah, I'm aware that will be the case with most voters. A shame, but that's how it works, although you could argue all the WC Champions from this decade didn't have the best sides "on paper". Tactics obviously made a difference (as well as match-rigging, luck and cheating
).As asked earlier, out of interest, what were the main drawbacks in my teamsheet?
314 views, 5 votes
Crap, no comeback shaping up and I will be in a meeting when it closes
COME ON!
COME ON!
both teams are pretty strong, but one of them has Hansen in it and i can't ever be on the same side as him, atleast not on an internet poll
I got stuffed for not being the side with Robbo in my first game, so I'll take that!
On the contrary, we'll have two-on-one's down whichever wing Brady and Souness ping the ball out to. Either Bossis or Nelinho will join to support Rep/Cha, isolating your full-back and penetrating your defence. By all means Boniek/Simonsen could track back, but then you're left with no genuine out-ball and the pressure continues.
Getting on the end of those chances will be Preben Elkjaer, and who better to testify to his talent than the opposition manager:
If you didn't catch that the first time:
And to think at the beginning you said I ahd too many people defending... Whichever place you ping the ball to the marker has immediate cover. Boniek and Simonsen did track back, but I doubt it will be needed, the more men you commit forward the more exposed you are at the back. Doesn't matter whether they receive in an adavanced position or behind the halfway line, they would skin anyone running back to cover so whatever you leave at the back is what you will be defending with as no one will catch up with them. I will gladly have you sending all your men forward.
I started off by admitting the respect I had for the attackers and the need not to give them any time and space. Part of it is remembering exactly what happened that day when some very naive defending took place. Slower defenders pushing up and playing the offside trap, that's exactly what I will not be doing and what I'm inviting you to do... and you seem to be very keen.
Neither De león nor Pereyra featured in the 6-1. Incidentally, one of the main outcomes of '86 for Uruguay was to finally recognise we would never be competitive playing those in the domestic league and leaving out of the national team anyone playing abroad. The economics of football were changing and a country with 3M people couldn't afford to not use players playing abroad.
That game may have been very different with De León and Pereyra, but the former was out of the NT since moving to Brazil, and the latter had been called up for the World Cup without having participated in the process. The manager took him as some sort of utility player just because he could play in defence or make the midfield tick (or had done that for the national team 10 years before!).
After the 6-1 debacle he was played in a bizarre DM role he had never played (as far as I know) and his impact organising the defence was felt immediately: 180 minutes, 90 with 10 men, 90 against the eventual champions, 1 goal (from a clearance into the centre of the box by the complete moron we had playing where De león should have been).
You'll struggle with two-on-ones down the flanks. You might get a centre-half lumbering out of their comfort zone to back up the full-back, but I'd feel confident given the pace and by-line-hitting ability of Cha and Rep, combined with the classy delivery from Nelinho, of creating chances.
Meanwhile I'll always keep three defenders back as well as Souness and Brady anchoring midfield. There's next to no scope for a counter there.
Going Gio, Like the shape and balance of the team, has Platini in a gap where he can really get the best out of him.
If you keep three at the back and Souness and Brady anchoring to prevent a counter then you can't in the same breath argue I'm outnumbered anywhere. You can't have your cake and eat it.
Fair enough re: shape and balance. Platini is no gap though.
Cripes - its totally even and I'm still undecided. Almost don't want my vote to be decisive here!
Screw it mate. I was 5-3 up when I left home. Just ducked out of a boring meeting to see the finale and find myself even.
I couldn't fathom another draw.
I honestly think this is a nailed on draw. If there was an option for draw I'd vote it
See I was thinking Antohan has a side well geared up for hitting Gio on the break, but Gio's midfield is strong enough and his defence composed enough to negate that.
So then I thought, well it would be down to which strike force would be able to get a lucky break. With Simonsen , Boniek and Schuster on one hand and Platini and Elkjaer on the other that's about even too.
So then I thought, well it would be down to which strike force would be able to get a lucky break. With Simonsen , Boniek and Schuster on one hand and Platini and Elkjaer on the other that's about even too.
You get more lucky breaks in open spaces like the ones I will be attacking than in tight ones. Anyhow, I get your point. I've been there before with the "draw option" thing.
Where's Nani? Polaroid and Jayvin didn't vote either, did they?
WTF???
Bad pass from Souness, Boniek on the run, he is past Nelinho, Hansen's on his arse...
And JiggsHamstring has won it!!!!!
Cheers for that one!!!!!
Bad pass from Souness, Boniek on the run, he is past Nelinho, Hansen's on his arse...
And JiggsHamstring has won it!!!!!
Cheers for that one!!!!!
I came on to congratulate you on a hard-fought draw only to find Boniek has scored a 94th minute winner.
Anyway, good game. Was going to ask about De Leon and Pereyra's absence in 1986, did they also miss out on the Copa triumphs around about that time?
Anyway, good game. Was going to ask about De Leon and Pereyra's absence in 1986, did they also miss out on the Copa triumphs around about that time?
It was really funny. I came in to check whether it had closed and it was open at a draw, I refreshed and it was closed at 6-5. I nearly started screaming "Get in!" in the middle of a Health Secretary presentation on the dangers of fake drugs sold on the internet
Re: your question. Both Pereyra and De León weren't called up again once they moved abroad.
Pereyra was a lot earlier in the mid-70s and had left as a midfield playmaker. It illustrates the extent to which our managers were domestic focused that he took him to the 86' World Cup as a backup midfielder when he had been a defender since ~79 and got the Bola de Prata playing as a CB in Brazil in 81, 83 and 86 itself
Only Zico got more Silver Balls from this draft (although him and Falcao got the Bola de Ouro -gold- as well). Unfortunately, by the time the foreign-based rule was relaxed he was at the end of his career so he wasn't involved in the 1987 Copa América either.De León left for Gremio in 1981 having just won the Libertadores and Intercontinental Cup with Nacional. Further, he had been a mainstay in Uruguay's defence during the Mundialito/Gold Cup held in Uruguay to celebrate 50 years of the World Cup (in January 1981 though).
It involved all the former champions (England declined the invite and Netherlands went instead). Uruguay 2 Netherlands 0, Uruguay 2 Italy 0, Uruguay 2 Brazil 1 in the final. Boy, did I get excited! They were all there at full strength so WC82 looked promising... Except we contrived not to qualify, partly because many of the players involved were picked up by foreign clubs straight after, partly because we always play better against big teams and screw up against the Peru's and Ecuador's of this world.
So from being key to our defence in that tournament, De León went on to disappear from the national team until his return to Uruguay in 1988, thus missing both Copa América wins.
I didn't mind at the time as I hated his guts. He was Nacional's Libertadores & Intercontinental Cup winning captain in 1980, when for the last half decade we had dominated them with Morena's goals. Peñarol got it all back in 1982 only for a De León-captained Gremio to take it all away beating us in the final in 83. He cleared a Morena header on the goal-line with minutes to go. That goal (Morena's third in two legs) would have given us back-to-back titles.
He also made the final in 84... Then in 87 Peñarol wins the Libertadores, so the royal cnut of a man comes back and makes Nacional Libertadores and Intercontinental Cup champions in 88.
Nemesis is the word, but 20-30 years on I'm no longer as blinkered: he was fecking good. "Xerife" (sheriff/marshall) as the Gremio fans refer to him.