All time British+Irish Fantasy Draft
- Thread starter crappycraperson
- Start date
What's your draft XI, out of interest? Mine has 8 English in it. 4-3-3/4-2-4
Hapgood has to be left back. No doubt in my opinion even if he wasn't my player.
Depends on what sort of left back you're actually after. Very few, if any, of these old school fullbacks are ideal fits as side backs. Hapgood's best role in a modern set-up would be that of a central defender, not a (modern) fullback. Same goes for Byrne. What I have argued regarding Byrne is that he played as an outside left in his youth - and that he was a fairly offensive minded player as such: He liked to venture forwards a bit, even as a fullback. In other words, he had a balance of offensive and defensive qualities which would suit a side back in a four.
That said, there's no doubt that Hapgood would do a good job as a defensive side back, i.e. one who isn't expected to run up and down the flank, overlapping and being an offensive piece in the puzzle. If THAT is the sort of side back you're after, someone like Ashley Cole would be a more natural choice than any of these old timers.
I agree to an extent but he played in a back three in an era where they were still not used to putting emphasis on defending. Not a back three as in a modern day 3-5-2 which is alot more defensive and the LCB is more a central defender. If you look at pictures of Hapgood and the style of his game as reported by people who have seen him play. He was very slight, agile and technical as well as intelligent both on the ball, defensively. Not bombing on of course but quality nonetheless. He'd never make it as a CB in the modern game.
two things I remember about Eddie Hapgood: (1)When he first joined Arsenal, whenever he headed a heavy wet ball, he tended to knock himself out. He had to build himself up with food and exercise to overcome the problem. (2)I once saw him play for Arsenal vs an RAF XI during WW2 in a charity game. Opposing him was the dazzling England right-winger and favourite of the fans, Stanley Matthews. Eddie never gave him a kick all match and every tackle that went in and interception made was met by a storm of booing. The large crowd felt cheated by not being able to see their hero perform his usual trickery against the opposing left back!
http://www.blog.woolwicharsenal.co.uk/archives/1877#sthash.SF7GalVO.dpuf
Last edited:
Maybe, probably - I don't know the pool that well. My choice was based on his and Byrne's ability to play as a modern left back - but maybe it's a mistake to assume that Byrne can (though he can, I'm sure of it) and Hapgood can not do that. Fullbacks are the toughest one for me here.
The competition in the middle though! Edwards, Keane, Robson, Souness, Mackay, Bremner + Blanchflower and Scholes
Maybe, probably - I don't know the pool that well. My choice was based on his and Byrne's ability to play as a modern left back - but maybe it's a mistake to assume that Byrne can (though he can, I'm sure of it) and Hapgood can not do that. Fullbacks are the toughest one for me here.
The competition in the middle though! Edwards, Keane, Robson, Souness, Mackay, Bremner + Blanchflower and Scholes
Crazy competition.. everyone has their own take on it I suppose, this would be my choice.
He famously got beefed up (literally too - he was a vegetarian and Chapman put him on a meat diet!) before becoming a regular for Arsenal, though. In the form he was in when Chapman discovered him, he never would've made it as any kind of defensive player back then: Chapman spotted his potential in spite of him being a wisp, which was part of his - Chapman's genius - but he didn't actually field that wisp of a lad: He made sure he bulked up.
As I see it, Hapgood was excellent on the ball for a fullback - and a very elegant sort of player: This made him stand out on top of being a brilliant defender. In modern terms I would say this makes him more plausible as a ball playing CB than a LB.
I don't agree with you general assessment of the (old) fullback role, if I understand you correctly - but hey, it's possible to interpret these things differently and it's certainly possible to argue both this and that when it comes to how suitable old timers are for more modern positions: Nothing is really written in stone there, as it always has to be a matter of, well, interpretation based on the player's individual characteristics.
Last edited:
Aye. In fact an all-time Scotland XI would match up or even better an English equivalent IMO.
This is what the managers say as a reflection of the price we payed for our boys:
Well, I'm willing to bet that team would win a final comfortably, so it certainly looks about right.
Could replace both Irwin and Neville, but then again they ain't eye sores either - especially not on a United forum.
I'd like to see a England v Scotland v Irish/welsh combo.
Don't think Finney and Best, with a goalscoring striker is really good at all to be frank. Can't really play three want-to-be top scorers at the same time up front and expect it to click.
Crazy competition.. everyone has their own take on it I suppose, this would be my choice.
Very similar to what I would pick as well. Charles and McGrain being possible exceptions but otherwise spot on. Dean could equally well be swapped out for some of the other top strikers too I think that one is very even. Edwards was of course at his peak as an attacking left half but I think he'd do a better job than the best DM's like Slater/Stiles.
Last edited:
Agree that three out-and-out goalscorers isn't the best blend for a front three. But that's not really the case with this trio. Finney and Best were very creative players and were not just about getting on the end of things in the same way that Ronaldo, Villa and Bale are as wide attackers. Same for Law up top whose rounded skillset meant he excelled in bringing others into play.
All things considered, this would be my XI:
I know it looks like a United XI, tough shit.
I'm yet to see why Matthews or Finney would justify shifting Best to the left when there's a Giggs.
Edwards could make it ahead of Keane, I'd keep Souness as the best all-rounder. Particularly given no PM or DM in CM (deliberate).
Irwin ahead of Cole/Wilson/Gemmell because he played with Giggs.
Narrowly miss: Greaves, Finney, Edwards, Rio-Mc Grath as a pacier pair, and McGrain.
I know it looks like a United XI, tough shit.
I'm yet to see why Matthews or Finney would justify shifting Best to the left when there's a Giggs.
Edwards could make it ahead of Keane, I'd keep Souness as the best all-rounder. Particularly given no PM or DM in CM (deliberate).
Irwin ahead of Cole/Wilson/Gemmell because he played with Giggs.
Narrowly miss: Greaves, Finney, Edwards, Rio-Mc Grath as a pacier pair, and McGrain.
The depth in the Scottish pool is just insane in some positions for a small nation.
Midfield especially.
All things considered, this would be my XI:
I know it looks like a United XI, tough shit.
I'm yet to see why Matthews or Finney would justify shifting Best to the left when there's a Giggs.
Edwards could make it ahead of Keane, I'd keep Souness as the best all-rounder. Particularly given no PM or DM in CM (deliberate).
Irwin ahead of Cole/Wilson/Gemmell because he played with Giggs.
Narrowly miss: Greaves, Finney, Edwards, Rio-Mc Grath as a pacier pair, and McGrain.
Nothing against that.
Well, I do question Charles, to be honest. Given the alternatives I wouldn't say he's an obvious CB choice here - but there you go. It ain't outrageous, I suppose - I'd be more inclined to let him lead the line if I were to start him, though.
Can't see anything wrong with it myself. Finney and Best are hardly one-dimensional goal grabbers.
Plus, my main point was that the assembled team would in all likelihood win a final comfortably - and I stand by that.
Pat's Notes:
Bolded Point 1: feck you man!
Bolded Point 2: I've always loved you.
Aye, central midfield is ridiculous, wingers almost as much, and at centre back there's alot of depth too. Right back is pretty good too with McGrain and Jardine (I've never had much time for that Young fella though
).Not implying they were solely goalscorers, but I don't think Real Madrid would be better off if they had Falcao centrally over Benzema, which Higuain showed. Someone has to end up being the unselfish player who makes it tick. If one has Finney and Best, they really need a false-9 who tries to set up the wingers.
I agree that if someone could gather that team they'd still win a final but rather due to the big-name aura of the team.
Not really. In my opinion they work equally well in that set-up as both finishers and providers. Plus, as Gio suggests, Law is quite well rounded for a finisher. He is neither Benzema nor Higuain - going by your analogy - but perhaps something in between. Only better, of course.
Unpicked heroes XI, abiding by the non English rule (McCoist was nominated but not picked up by anyone):
Agreed, you could tie yourself in knots arguing about this 'fits the system better' stuff. Ultimately, two wingers who are equally happy scoring or providing, and an exceptonally well-rounded centre forward, fit just about any system.
You missed the key trick there. It would have been more obvious if I picked Hapgood at LB, but I'd rather not delve into those I know little much about. Moore calls for a big stopper next to him and, while there may be other candidates, none could switch so naturally to being Law's devastating and uber-compatible strike partner if needed, leaving a back three behind, United-in-Fergie-time style.
You missed the key trick there. It would have been more obvious if I picked Hapgood at LB, but I'd rather not delve into those I know little much about. Moore calls for a big stopper next to him and, while there may be other candidates, none could switch so naturally to being Law's devastating and uber-compatible strike partner if needed, leaving a back three behind, United-in-Fergie-time style.
He's handy like that - sure.
You could - of course - go the more traditional route and bring on a sub for that Fergie time finish...
And, no - I'm no advocate of Hapgood at LB as suggested above. I'd rather have Dennis there myself in that particular set-up.
Unpicked heroes XI, abiding by the non English rule (McCoist was nominated but not picked up by anyone):
Le Tissier doesn't even make this list?
Last edited:
Sent all my stuff to crappy, so whenever's good for you, my man!
disagree with no scholes(gazza) and Ferdinand(Franklin)
Funnily enough, those were the two.. I dithered about. My justification was that peak Gascoigne was a talent above and beyond a peak Scholes in my opinion, a guy who could make an unbelievable impact in top games and a proper character and reference point, even when put in a team with other big characters. Franklin is too well spoken of for me to not select him, an English Baresi etc? all the greats speak very highly of him, but yeah.. I wouldn't be against the other two coming into the side - put it that way.
My justification was that you can push charlton up as an AM and have scholes in his place but like you said its very close anyway.
1st choice
.......................O'Shea
Armfield......Moore....Ferdinand.....Irwin
................Keane...........Souness
...........................Charlton
Matthews.......................................Best
.............................Law
2nd choice
.........................Banks
McGrain.....Franklin...McGrath.....Cole
...................Robson.........Edwards
...........................Scholes
Finney........................................Giggs
.....................Charles
.......................O'Shea
Armfield......Moore....Ferdinand.....Irwin
................Keane...........Souness
...........................Charlton
Matthews.......................................Best
.............................Law
2nd choice
.........................Banks
McGrain.....Franklin...McGrath.....Cole
...................Robson.........Edwards
...........................Scholes
Finney........................................Giggs
.....................Charles
Very good XIs but surely Brady has to be in the first one ahead of Giles.
Pity Mackay misses out too but those 3 Scottish midfielder are perhaps rightly ahead of him.
Gazza was a fine talent but not that great to push Charlton into the midfield when you've got the likes of Robson and Scholes knocking about.
Disagree with your claim about Gazza being a notch above Scholes talent wise at his peak. Id actually put it the other way round but that's subjective and you're entitled to your opinion.
Franklin is a contentious pick but you can justify his inclusion. Same for Hapgood, rest is fine.
Yeah definitely Brady over Giles, oversight on my part. As for the others it is touch and go for me. Initially I had Scholes in alongside Edwards and in reality, I think that team would work better.. but when I'm creating these teams, I try to look for reference points, guys who influenced games at the highest level at their peak.. and try and fit them in somehow (hence Bestie as a false 9 of sorts - saw him play in such a role v Benfica and he was amazing), others might have a different way of going about it.
Gascoigne was such a talent, this is him after many injuries, slightly podgy and running a top dutch side (containing the Van Gaal Ajax legends) ragged. Such inteliigence and artistry in his game, matched with physical power and pace at his peak.. (cruyff turns, step overs, brilliant burst of pace and agility/balance) he was a complete 10. I don't think Scholes ever produced performances like this for England and as for United.. for alot of his career, he didn't really dominate the top games as much as we like to think looking back.. it was the latter day Scholes who succeeded in doing that, but again a peak gazza was something else.. I mean Fergie's biggest regret is not signing him - says it all. Closest english talent to a Maradona in my opinion.
Last edited:
Sure, we can just wait for @crappycraperson to kick it off?
Again agree with you on Real Madrid and Benzema generally doesn't get his dues there. But that's a very different scenario where Ronaldo and Bale are all about getting on the end of things, free-roaming goalscorers who provide a hell of a lot less than the likes of Best and Finney.
You could crowbar him in at left-back, given his qualities and experience both at left-half and in defence. Sandy Jardine and Danny McGrain would be the typical shouts at full-back, both were class acts, and while both favoured the right side, they can do a job on the left. They were our pair at the '74 World Cup and were regarded by many as the best in the competition. McGrain in particular would be a straightforward call for the RB slot in a draft select. Goram is the obvious choice in the sticks, Hansen a clear standout for his club career and, thinking in a modern sense Miller would be his partner, but given the difficulties they faced as a partnership, Meiklejohn would be the man to include. The likes of McNeill, Gough, Greig and Raisbeck would have decent shouts to be involved. Central midfield is very competitive and you'd take any two from Souness, Bremner, Baxter and Mackay. The likes of Murdoch, McStay and Ferguson aren't miles away either. On the flanks Morton and Johnstone are easy picks, with plenty of depth on the right in Gallacher, Waddell and Henderson. Dalglish and Law pick themselves up top.
@Gio
Where would you rate the likes of McGrory and Alex James in relation to an all time Scottish XI. Would they be amongst your second choices?
If you wouldn't mind, could you do your second choice Scottish XI as well? Just curious given the great depth that they have.
Where would you rate the likes of McGrory and Alex James in relation to an all time Scottish XI. Would they be amongst your second choices?
If you wouldn't mind, could you do your second choice Scottish XI as well? Just curious given the great depth that they have.
Le Tissier doesn't even make this list?
Well, it's an XI (I had him on the list, as it were). There's only one place he can play, really - and there you have it. I'd been banging the Milburn drum earlier on, so I had to pick him. Plus, in all fairness, I reckon he was a level above Le Tissier.