Went with Diarm. I don't even really rate Vieri never mind a poor version of him!
All Time Chain Draft - QF2: antohan vs diarm
- Thread starter green_smiley
- Start date
Granted, but he offered plenty of width at Mexico '86 playing the same sort of role. And you've got a right-footed left-back of your own there.
Looking forward to the big Facchetti post that will provoke.
Not a liability at all. Perfectly fine, more or less, but they're not impressive - they don't give you any sort of edge. Whereas his does. It's one of the key points of the match - can't say otherwise.
In this context - and I know you won't get me wrong here, because you know precisely what this is about - having to emphasize that they're fine internationals with over 250 caps between 'em is as much as saying: They're alright!
And they are, more than that. But there's no comparison. And I wouldn't be targeting this if I didn't think it was genuinely important. If you sported an attacking force equal to anto's defensive quartet or quintet - this would be unproblematic. But you sort of don't - so it sort of is.
Alright, let's be done with this - I'm just repeating myself here.
I vote anto - but my true love is the roulette, so bring it on.
5 pages and only 14 votes?
In the end I went with anto - his backline is perfect and diarm's is far from it, and there lies the difference. Don't see any issue with diarm's midfield though, Schuster is a fantastic addition and this trio would work like a charm.
In the end I went with anto - his backline is perfect and diarm's is far from it, and there lies the difference. Don't see any issue with diarm's midfield though, Schuster is a fantastic addition and this trio would work like a charm.
tbf I'm with anto here, theoretically - I always consider the mental side of my teams. Neville is enough though, not sure why diarm picked Amoros for the captaincy.
I was just about to say I can't believe you've gone against Schuster harms!
I'll be gutted if I lose this just because his defence is better. It is but mine isn't bad and I honestly believe my midfield and attack are better set up than his.
Tell me you can't see Bernd doing this:
or this:
or even Tardelli doing this:
to change this game. That's before we even consider the front 3 and their brilliance.
Nice one
And Baggio and Scholes
They would all probably be in my all-time favorite XIAnd Baggio and Scholes
Mine as well. Tardelli wouldn't be far off either!
This is what I'm struggling to get. Why do GOAT defenders outweigh GOAT midfielders or attackers? That trio of Scholes, Schuster and Baggio, protected and enforced by Tardelli and complimented by Völler and Klinsmann just looks exquisite to me. I know his defence is great but we would score goals in this game.
Well, perhaps. But if your lads will score against his defence, then his lads will score against yours. He's sporting Cubillas behind Schiaffino and that Swede who's only slightly worse than Erico. And they're up against regular pros compared to what yours are up against.
GOATS...endless debate and not really productive. But for me, if you line up any three attackers you can muster against Figueroa, Scirea and Facchetti - you just can't win GOAT wise. Not even Baggio is on that level.
That's the main problem when you twist it that way - his defenders are insane. You need more than Baggio (and anyone you have is behind him again) if you're going to out-GOAT that lot.
Scholes and Baggio
I'd have to disagree with that. I don't agree with the assertion that Amoros won't have the room or the freedom to commit forward. Anto's attack is fairly lop-sided towards the left with Cubillas-Schiaffino-Facchetti and the right side is relatively clearer with the presence of just Abbadie, with Andrade playing a more defensive role to accommodate Facchetti's attacking gameplay on the left. Not downplaying Abbadie but it will be an up and down game with both Abbadie and Amoros attacking and tracking back each other etc. However, given that diarm will have the upper hand in the possession stakes here, I'd say Amoros would have the edge here and will more than get the chance to make his impact in the final third and will complement Baggio perfectly, who'd be occupying the RB/defensive mid's attention. Needless to say, Abbadie will get his chances on the counter but Amoros was a top notch balanced FB who won't be exposed much imo and a it stands, I'd see Abbadie struggling to contain Amoros's forays forward, given the sheer attacking quality he possessed when going forward. Something which he exhibited time and time again for the narrow-ish French team of the eighties, playing as a wing-back.
I'm really torn for this one, on one hand I can see anto doing an Italian job with his defense holding the fort and releasing one of his dangerous forwards to hit diarm on the counter. On the other I can see, diarm's midfield quality and incisiveness eventually breaking through the wall - as good as anto's defense is, it's hard to keep a clean sheet with the likes of Tardelli-Schuster-Baggio-Scholes-Völler-Klinsmann banging on the door, with the side dominating possession.
Also, I think I'd voted for anto here, if he just had a proven passer to make that rapid transition from defense to attack. He'd pelt me with gifs of Goncalves and Varela etc but they were decent passers and not your Pirlo/Redondo etc. Period. Scirea was more about influencing build-up play and aiding the midfield rather than a rapid counter-attacking passer or someone who can entirely bypass the midfield ala Hierro or Koeman. That is my primary qualm with anto's side, no one is arguing about him holding the fort but can he release the pressure and set forth his forwards on the counter in time? Or will his runners (Abbadie, Cubillas etc) need to drop deep to initiate the counters by collecting the ball from a deeper position, meaning the likes of Schuster, Amoros etc have more than enough time to get back on the ball and take the sting out of the counter? He does have Schiaffino who is more of an attacking playmaker in the opponent's half and someone who won't be dropping back all the way to initiate counter-attacks. In that sense I didn't like the Abbadie winger switch as he was playing the Beckham-esque role for anto (according to him) in the previous match and was a crucial passing outlet for him.
Oh dear, that Cubillas-Schiaffino-Nordahl triangle just looks so tasty! I can definitely see those three working very well together even if Schiaffino and Cubillas are both players who want to get on the ball. The combinations between those two with Nordahl on the end of them would be a joy to watch. Right-winger Abbadie is also quite complementary to those players with him staying out wide and playing a more direct game.
For such a mercurial, spicy attack, there is a good solid back 6 that complements this attack. Facchetti going forward will allow Schiaffino to play his natural game, and with two disciplined midfielders in Goncalves and Varela as well as a complete, solid back line, the front 4 + Facchetti will have a good amount of freedom going forward. Having said what I said about Facchetti, he is a defend-first, attack-later sort of a full back unlike the wing backs nowadays. Playing in a deep setup is also ideal for the sort of players he has and should make them tough to get past.
Still, though, it's not like great defences will always keep teams out. diarm's attack is also very tasty; for me, it has more zest than Anto's attack. Baggio and Schuster are two of the most creative, incisive attacking players to ever play the game. Voller's dynamic and all-rounded game also gave opposition defences problems; should they stick tight to him, or should they give him space? Defences basically had to pick their poison against him. Klinsi will also make life tough for Scirea and Figueroa with his tireless running and unpredictable movement. They can't afford to continuously keep an eye on him with Baggio roaming around as well.
After that, you have Scholes and Tardelli, which is a great midfield partnership. Scholes as a deep-lying playmaker was quite adept in his defensive positioning and would compensate for his lack of defensive skills with good positioning and reading of the game, which contributed to his dominant performances. Tardelli is the perfect partner for him as well; his tireless, energetic approach combined with his anticipation and intelligence makes diarm's midfield tough to overcome. Then, you have Schuster around who can press from high up and unsettle Anto's deeper players on the ball.
diarm's defence is also one that should not be underrated. Neville was quite a reliable and composed defender when he matured, and he did a good job marking out opposing wide players. Giuseppe Baresi and Campbell's quite a good, complementary defence. Putting aside his interesting personality, Campbell was Arsenal's best player against Barcelona in the 2006 Champions League final when they went down to 10 men. Also, when Adams was getting older, Campbell did a great job in filling the void for Arsenal and keeping that defence mean and solid. Put Campbell under a head coach/manager who valued defending more than Wenger did, and I'm sure he'd be better remembered in his Arsenal days. Then, you have Amoros, who was a reliable full back on both ends.
Overall, when looking at the teams, anto playing a deeper defensive line and trying to shore up their own third will really benefit Scholes here. I don't think that any of Anto's front 4 can unsettle Scholes and suppress his influence. Even against teams that tried to suppress his influence, Scholes was still able to control matches, and against a deep defensive line, Scholes will definitely have joy in dictating the game. If Anto's deeper midfield players try to close down Scholes, Scholes is quite adept in playing someone else quickly into space, and with Baggio and Schuster roaming around with Tardelli providing ample support on the ball, Anto's midfield will have a tough time suppressing Scholes' influence. This should be good news for Klinsi, Rudi, and Baggio, who will get played into dangerous areas, keeping Anto's defence on their toes.
Both teams will definitely get past the respective defences. The question here is (and yes, this is a very naive and stupid question): who will get past more often? At this point, I see a draw. Anto's attack will have more joy against diarm's defence, but diarm's team will have more possession of the ball and arguably more control of the game. I'm not sure where to really go.
Oh well, I'll vote for diarm just to promote the draw result and take this into penalties.
For such a mercurial, spicy attack, there is a good solid back 6 that complements this attack. Facchetti going forward will allow Schiaffino to play his natural game, and with two disciplined midfielders in Goncalves and Varela as well as a complete, solid back line, the front 4 + Facchetti will have a good amount of freedom going forward. Having said what I said about Facchetti, he is a defend-first, attack-later sort of a full back unlike the wing backs nowadays. Playing in a deep setup is also ideal for the sort of players he has and should make them tough to get past.
Still, though, it's not like great defences will always keep teams out. diarm's attack is also very tasty; for me, it has more zest than Anto's attack. Baggio and Schuster are two of the most creative, incisive attacking players to ever play the game. Voller's dynamic and all-rounded game also gave opposition defences problems; should they stick tight to him, or should they give him space? Defences basically had to pick their poison against him. Klinsi will also make life tough for Scirea and Figueroa with his tireless running and unpredictable movement. They can't afford to continuously keep an eye on him with Baggio roaming around as well.
After that, you have Scholes and Tardelli, which is a great midfield partnership. Scholes as a deep-lying playmaker was quite adept in his defensive positioning and would compensate for his lack of defensive skills with good positioning and reading of the game, which contributed to his dominant performances. Tardelli is the perfect partner for him as well; his tireless, energetic approach combined with his anticipation and intelligence makes diarm's midfield tough to overcome. Then, you have Schuster around who can press from high up and unsettle Anto's deeper players on the ball.
diarm's defence is also one that should not be underrated. Neville was quite a reliable and composed defender when he matured, and he did a good job marking out opposing wide players. Giuseppe Baresi and Campbell's quite a good, complementary defence. Putting aside his interesting personality, Campbell was Arsenal's best player against Barcelona in the 2006 Champions League final when they went down to 10 men. Also, when Adams was getting older, Campbell did a great job in filling the void for Arsenal and keeping that defence mean and solid. Put Campbell under a head coach/manager who valued defending more than Wenger did, and I'm sure he'd be better remembered in his Arsenal days. Then, you have Amoros, who was a reliable full back on both ends.
Overall, when looking at the teams, anto playing a deeper defensive line and trying to shore up their own third will really benefit Scholes here. I don't think that any of Anto's front 4 can unsettle Scholes and suppress his influence. Even against teams that tried to suppress his influence, Scholes was still able to control matches, and against a deep defensive line, Scholes will definitely have joy in dictating the game. If Anto's deeper midfield players try to close down Scholes, Scholes is quite adept in playing someone else quickly into space, and with Baggio and Schuster roaming around with Tardelli providing ample support on the ball, Anto's midfield will have a tough time suppressing Scholes' influence. This should be good news for Klinsi, Rudi, and Baggio, who will get played into dangerous areas, keeping Anto's defence on their toes.
Both teams will definitely get past the respective defences. The question here is (and yes, this is a very naive and stupid question): who will get past more often? At this point, I see a draw. Anto's attack will have more joy against diarm's defence, but diarm's team will have more possession of the ball and arguably more control of the game. I'm not sure where to really go.
Oh well, I'll vote for diarm just to promote the draw result and take this into penalties.
That's a great post and really sums up a lot of the strengths of each side. It'll certainly be a close game and I don't for a second doubt the threat of Anto's team. But like you said, my side will have more possession and more control. I think that will give my attack the opportunities to find ways through his excellent defence.
Good job sour puss getting that bang on at the start of a page. Top marks.
For all the broken records going around on how I did some form of hatchet job on Nordahl @Chesterlestreet is spot on:
AT LEAST I COMPARED HIM TO ERICO RATHER THAN TURN A BLIND EYE TO HOW MUCH HE WOULD PUNISH SOL CAMPBELL
And at least I had a reason to do that too.
If anyone is doing Nordahl a disservice here it is those not acknowledging that gigantic disparity. I may as well have kept Altafini on, clearly. So there goes Nordahl onto the same scrap heap you believe Altafini and Boninsegna belong in: the one reserved for players who can't beat Sol Campbell who is playing in a high line next to Giuseppe feckin' Baresi and having to also cover his fullback while minding Nordahl.
Yeah, like that would work at all...
Good job sour puss getting that bang on at the start of a page. Top marks.
For all the broken records going around on how I did some form of hatchet job on Nordahl @Chesterlestreet is spot on:
AT LEAST I COMPARED HIM TO ERICO RATHER THAN TURN A BLIND EYE TO HOW MUCH HE WOULD PUNISH SOL CAMPBELL
Yeah, like that would work at all...
Antohan - "He is no Vieri on steroids, not even Vieri, but a poor man's Christian Vieri."
I'm not forgetting Tardelli, I have acknowledged several times he is your most important player as he is the only one doing any kind of competent defensive/shielding work.
The funny thing is I said I would slice through your defence and you had to bring up a midfielder. Simply because you know none of your defenders are up to the job at hand (Amoros would be fine if he weren't leaving such massive space behind him).
Good job making up this storyline whereby Gre-No-Li were no use unless they played together (see @Annahnomoss? this is what you get). It's paramount to saying Rummenigge was shite without Breitner. Completely absurd.
That said, players being familiar with each other can of course augment players. I've acknowledged Rudi and Klinsmann have that going for them, so I'm not sure why you, the faux honesty crusader, insist in ignoring what a phenomenal understanding Schiaffino and Nordahl had.
I have key real life partnerships exactly where I need them:
Yeah, and? So what? How many times do we make ludicrous statements in drafts? It's easy enough for anyone to check/rubbish it as well.
I would be far more worried about how Nordahl is de facto supposedly not a match for Campbell here. Or how diarm is singing the tune that he was useless without Liddas or Gren.
It was also almost three years ago by the way, I'd like to think I've changed a fair bit since then. And no, Mauro Ramos is a crap defender, I'll keep saying that to my deathbed. He had other things going for him, but anyone whose positioning is THAT hopeless is a bad defender in my book.
So yeah, go on, keep sucking your sour grapes.
I wasn't referring to that being an issue. I was just saying what matters is what you do with your possession. I'll be happy having 40% possession. In fact, I'll murder him if I get that much.
Yeah that's fair enough. For me, I don't think he'll have "enough" of the ball to do this damage to my defence!
See above. Inter had less than 40% against a much more functional Barca side than yours in 2010.
They lost 3-1, and my team is significantly better.
Went with Diarm. I don't even really rate Vieri never mind a poor version of him!
Feckin' idiot One thing that grates me is how it's simply painted as "doing an Italian job". The entire point of the theme I'm trying to put together is explaining the roots of catenaccio and were it went wrong.
One of the places it has gone wrong is what Abbadie said about ten years ago: “we were a cagey side that would switch to the counter like a panther thrusts its paws, Bam! Bam! Game Over. It doesn’t work any more, you can’t sit back and soak and win on the break, it rarely happens. But that’s not the tactic being flawed, the problem is we no longer see ‘manoeuverers, jugglers, dribblers and ball-steppers’ like we used to”. “We always had at least two if not three or four on the pitch who could do that at pace and rip a team apart, however good their defenders were. Where there is space the advantage is always on the attackers’ side”.
Italian football overdid the packing up of disciplined water carriers at the expense of such players. Result: they were branded as boring. But it is nothing of the sort when well executed, Juve in the early 80s being a clear example. Also, imagine if Baggio '94 had only had 2-3 more players supporting him appropriately and not having to do everything solo...
It's not a 1-0 recipe, it's a keep scoring and making the oppo take more risks to get back into it... so keep scoring!
So that's one of the points to drive with the theme. The other isn't there yet, but hopefully we will get to it.
Goes back to the above. Yes, I could have started more conservative but it runs counter to where I want to get with the theme. It's as much about awesome defending (which was more necessary against you, you simply had a better team than diarm's) as it is about the counterstrikes.
Differently from diarm keeping his options open about which version of Schuster/Scholes he plays, I thought I had to put my bollocks on the line from the start and determine which Abbadie was playing.
A key point here is before I was facing Nilton Santos and Rivelino, winger Abbadie would have been suicidal there. But I can let Amoros run up the pitch to provide width, minded by Andrade and exploit the space behind him properly with the 50s winger.
I disagree with you on the point about passing and this provides a clear example: why exactly do I need a conservative Abbadie as an outlet? If I'm getting the ball over to him I may as well pass it in front of him so he goes off on one down the flank. I don't need players to be Ronald Koeman or Pirlo to play the sort of balls I need. If some get intercepted tough shit, the ones that don't are almost half goals AFAIC.
Copout. Possession is getting massively overrated here. The ability to penetrate a defence and get clear goalscoring opportunities is all that really matters in football.
Looks like no one has been watching our games lately.
Yes and he has the players who can hurt you when on the ball. Scholes never played possession football and was all about creating quick counter attacks in his prime. Give him the ball enough, and he will create scoring opportunities for diarm. To round up his midfield he has Tardelli, Baggio and Schuster all of whom have excellent vision,creativity and dribbling ability and one of the most clinical strikers leading the line.
There is a lot of movement and flair there which is ofcourse countered by your excellent defense and midfield. All in all, it will be a very close match and not as simple a case as you having 40% possession= immediate win.
One thing I find strange is that you have schiaffino playing as a Number 10/ Left winger but are describing him as one of the greatest registas of all time? Does the term regista means something different in south america than europe?
Lest we forget, diarm started the game with Scholes anchoring the midfield and got shot of that idea after the game equivalent of 10-15 minutes (or half-time if we are going by pages!).
By then, this had happened a few times:
And then this was about to happen:
So he got crudely chopped down by Scholesy. To no avail:
By then, this had happened a few times:
And then this was about to happen:
So he got crudely chopped down by Scholesy. To no avail:
Exactly, Scholes was about quick counter-attacks in teams that spread the play offering him several options. Here you don't have much scope for counter-attacking (because I'm largely sitting back and staying compact) and you don't have the options afforded to Scholes. Everything is largely happening through the middle. Sure, some player may go a bit wide here or there but ultimately he is playing into a funnel with a superb quartet choking it (Scirea-Figueroa-Tito-Varela).
If we are talking about his midfield and defence then yes, it's close, where he loses it is his defence simply doesn't belong in an All-Time quarter final. It's as simple as that. diarm did a good job of "mistaking" Giuseppe Baresi for Italy's captain in 1990, granted, he now has people either mistaking him for the guy with the same name or the guy with the same surname. He is not a patch on either, and he is facing Juan Alberto Schiaffino.
That's why I don't think this is a contest. I understand all you guys wanting to make it competitive and cheering the underdog and maybe even going with diarm's line to let the inner muppet in you "go with what you know". But the only thing you really know for a fact here is that defence will get destroyed.
Gianni Brera, the guy calling Schiaffino the greatest regista of all time is the guy who invented the term applied to football so he can't possibly be wrong on its use
In short, regista is actually the orchestrator/playmaker (the actual translation is "Director"). Part of my story going forward (if I do) also alluded to that precisely: how the term regista wound up being short for deep playmaker. Why? Because as Italy adopted catenaccio, they increasingly deployed deep playmakers (e.g. Luis Suárez!) and with them calling them registas the rest of the world applied the term to that sort of playmaker specifically.
You do have a fair point about his play largely being centered in the middle where you are exceptionally strong defensively. I suppose its a question of whether his forwards can maintain enough width by drifting wide and dragging your players with them.
Another potentially stupid question, werent both scirea and figueroa liberos, who liked to join the attack from the back?
hmm, agree with this as well. I think amoros belongs in this company while neville is debatable( I would probably go for no). But Campbell shouldnt be on the pitch in any circumstances but while I know your post about nordahl was largely tactical I think you did have a point about defenses being weaker back then as seen by the goals per game back then. Am not sure how he would actually do against a side which atleast will be organized in defense if lacking in quality.
Although I suppose thats the same problem when comparing across eras. How do you account for the changes in the football laws and how the tactics have developed,etc.
Gianni Brera, the guy calling Schiaffino the greatest regista of all time is the guy who invented the term applied to football so he can't possibly be wrong on its use
In short, regista is actually the orchestrator/playmaker (the actual translation is "Director"). Part of my story going forward (if I do) also alluded to that precisely: how the term regista wound up being short for deep playmaker. Why? Because as Italy adopted catenaccio, they increasingly deployed deep playmakers (e.g. Luis Suárez!) and with them calling them registas the rest of the world applied the term to that sort of playmaker specifically.
I actually want you to go through now as that would be an excellent read!Scirea definitely, he turned that role into an art form. Figueroa was a flawless all-rounder, the most complete defender I've seen. He could play as a libero and push the team forward, but first and foremost he was a defender. We usually divide stoppers and ball-playing defenders, but Figueroa was really both in one. It's not even something that developed/changed with time, you can watch the 1974 World Cup and one game he is the one-man defence against Germany and then you watch another game and he is foraging forward because it's a game in which he can be more advenurous.
Beckenbauer said:
a characteristically "humble" Passarella said:
Carlos Alberto Parreira said:
There's a clip somewhere in which Jimmy Johnstone faces him one-on-one, starts doing all sorts of tricks on the ball to bamboozle him and Figueroa (at Peñarol then) just stands there watching... and then Johnstone finally makes his move and Elías sticks his foot out and gets the ball as Johnstone sprints past him without it. Then he just plays out of defence as if he were playing against Sunday footballers.
Love that geezer, he is awesome.
Organised? They are playing a high line against a counter-attacking side spear-headed by the greatest Uruguayan player of all time, AC Milan's top scorer ever, both supported by Genoa's best player ever (and one of Uruguay's greatest wingers), the best attacking fullback in history and the top scoring midfielder at World Cups!
Against Campbell, Beppe and Neville (and Amoros if he makes it back at all).
They will be in complete disarray, they simply aren't up to the job and anyone arguing this game boils down to anything else is quite simply being dishonest about it all.
We've long agreed that shouldn't be a factor. Gerson couldn't get on a pitch these days otherwise.
Last edited:
Anyhow, this is dead and I have to go to bed
The words 'square of death' come to mind.
You haven't voted
You haven't voted
You haven't voted either.
It is, absolutely, what about voting?
I actually did 15 minutes ago
. Stop panicking ffs.That trio of Scholes/Schuster/Baggio are going to take the piss at times in Diarm's midfield
Looks unbelievablely good on the ball and should have the opposition chasing shadows at times, no doubt.
I don't love the defence though and I would prefer someone more offensive than Gaz playing that role on the right, considering the lack of width.
Mediocre defences lose games at this level.
I actually did 15 minutes ago
Oh, OK. I'm just alerting those who haven't voted so I can get to friggin' 200!
Vote then?
Lest I forget: @berbasloth4 isn't banned any more!