All Time Chain Draft - SF1: Tuppet vs diarm

With players at career peak, who will win the match?


  • Total voters
    30
  • Poll closed .

Edgar Allan Pillow

Ero-Sennin
Joined
Dec 7, 2010
Messages
42,037
Location
┴┬┴┤( ͡° ͜ʖ├┬┴┬
VivaTuppet-formation-tactics.png
vs

....................................... Team Tuppet ...................................................................................... Team diarm ..........................................


Team Tuppet:

New Addition:

Our team welcomes the best attacking left back in Roberto Carlos and a brilliant striker in Eto’o, fixing two of the biggest problem in our squad.

Tactic:

We’ll be playing a fluid 4-2-3-1/4-3-3 formation.

At the back we have 2 world class defenders, in Nesta and Costacurta. Both have won all there is to win and provide class and solidity to my backline also sporting 2 fantastic physical attacking fullbacks in Reuter and Roberto Carlos. Both of my full backs although attacking and aggressive are still very good in defending and have the ability to own the flanks all by themselves. This defense is then protected with one of the finest defensive midfielder Makelele. As good as Diarm’s attack is, its going to be very hard to break down our defense.

At Midfield, Makelele would play the holding role, doing the dirty work for Van Hanegem to run his magic. His extraordinary vision and passing, as well as ball retention abilities would help him to create many chances for our fantastic attack. Van Hanegem was an extraordinary playmaker, who was as tenacious as he was creative. As great Johan Cruyff said himself - “Van Hanegem has one advantage over me. When I have a bad game, I’m useless. When Van Hanegem has a bad game, he rolls up his sleeves and starts tackling.” He is right up there with the likes of Cruyff and is the standout midfielder on the pitch. To round of this midfield we have Gullit playing as the most advanced midfielder. A ballon d’or winner and one of the finest and most unique attacking midfielder, he provides further muscle and creativity to our midfield.

In attack Gullit with his explosiveness and physicality would run through the opposition midfield. Also he is one of the best header of the ball in game. A deep cross from Roberto Carlos, Van Hanegem or Reuter to Gullit is a simple yet very effective route to goal. In flanks I have Nedved, further adding work rate and creativity from the left side and he would look to stretch the defense of Diarm. He would provide overlaps to Roberto Carlos and together they should prove too much handle for Neville. On the other flank I have 2 times Ballon D’or winner Rummenigge, who along with Baggio is the standout attacker on the pitch. With Reuter overlapping while he cuts inside, Amoros is going to find it very hard to provide any attacking impetus or width to team Diarm.

Finally in Eto’o we have a lethal striker with pace to burn. His presence means the defenders can not live easily, or hold up a high line comfortably. Especially against Vidic, Eto’s pace would be very useful. With the likes of Van Hanegem, Nedved, Gullit providing chances to Eto’o and Rummenigge, I am sure our team would score goals here.


Why would we win:

Diarm has a brilliant team and there is not really much between our teams. Both midfields are fantastic and attacks are pretty even. The advantage our team has over him is in width, we have more varied attack and more ways to punish our opponent. Be it the lethal finishing of Eto’o or Rummenigge, or heading of Gullit. Especially Nedved - Roberto Carlos vs Neville is a great route for us. With no special wide threat Roberto Carlos would really dominate the left flank. The presence of Gullit - Hanegem allows us to hold on to possession, while our pace in wings and upfront means we can also play a quick counter attack.

Overall its going to be a very tight game, and with our advantage on the wings, I think we would nick a win here.


Team diarm:

Tactics

Formation: 4222 - "The Wonky Rhombus"
  • Defence - The defensively excellent Neville alongside the magnificent defensive partnership of Ferdinand and Vidic. Amoros offers a more attacking threat from LWB.
  • Midfield - Scholes as a deep lying playmaker, protected by a true box to box, all action footballer in Tardelli and a more advanced playmaker in Schuster who will offer width and class, linking with fake 9.5 Baggio in much the same way as he did with Maradona at Barca.
  • Attack - An ideal trio combing an inside forward/No.10 extraordinaire in Baggio, a complete CF with pace to burn in Völler and a ruthless striker in Klinsmann. This exceptional partnership will torment our opponents defence and create space for Baggio to punish.
Key Focus Areas
  • Dominate possession with Scholes, Tardelli and Schuster dictating the tempo of the game.
  • Use Amoros and Schuster, along with the movement of Baggio and Völler to provide width and pace.
  • Look to exploit the excellent movement of our front 3 by making use of Scholes long range passing, Schusters slide rule passing (delicious through balls!) and Tardelli's running from midfield to join the attack.
Why Team Diarm Will Win
  • World class, balanced midfield. Scholes and Schuster are two of the finest midfielders ever to pass a ball and Tardelli is the sort of warrior every manager wishes he had in the middle of the park. We plan to dominate possession of the ball, allowing our two playmakers to put the ball in areas where Baggio, Völler and Klinsmann can hurt the opposition.
  • We have a beautifully balanced and incredibly talented front 3. The dribbling and general brilliance of Baggio operating between the lines and able to attack the box from central or wider areas will be complimented by the pace and movement of Völler. The German's ability to both run at defenders and to pull into wider areas, looking to receive the ball from Scholes or Schuster, will pull defenders out of position and create space for Baggio to dribble into. Once in the box, both players are lethal and here they'll be joined by a sublime striker who is no less deadly.
  • Incredible defence with three of the finest defenders in Manchester United history in Rio, Vida and Neville, plus the superb Manuel Amoros. Strength, balance, pace and understanding will allow this four to come out on top of what is a fine, but not overly cohesive attack.
  • Proven partnerships and understanding in key areas. Neville, Rio, Vidic and Scholes have done it together at the highest levels of the European game. The centre back pair in particular will have a massive impact in this game, while on the other side Costacurta/Nesta doesn't look a partnership with the same balance or ability for me. Up front we have one of the finest strike partnerships of all time and two ruthless German predators in their own rights. Behind them, Baggio and Schuster look like they were meant to play together and Tardelli as an upgraded Roy Keane is a perfect partner for the brilliant Scholes.

Best of luck to our opponents and here's to what should be a great game.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I'd echo a lot of what @Tuppet has said here. Two very good and evenly matched sides and it should be a great game. I'd agree that his side offers slightly better width, especially with his fullbacks but then I think my midfield and that diamond along with Baggio will edge his side in the middle of the park. I also prefer my centre backs and think that those two key, established partnerships of Rio and Vida at the back and Völler and Klinsmann up top, will make the crucial difference in this game.
 
Makelele/Van Hanegem/Gullit versus Tardelli/Scholes/Schuster. Jesus :eek:. Its incredibly difficult to even begin to seperate these two teams, although Roberto Carlos/Nedved look well poised to give Nevillea tough game. That said I'm a bit disappointed that Del Piero hasn't retained his starting role at inside left, particularly given that Carlos will be providing so much width. Nedved vs Del Piero is a tough decision of course, but Im just very high on Del Piero circa 1998 at the minute, and his additional goal threat and set piece ability would offset Baggio's qualities nicely.
 
Best of luck @diarm

Yeah I'd echo a lot of what @Tuppet has said here. Two very good and evenly matched sides and it should be a great game. I'd agree that his side offers slightly better width, especially with his fullbacks but then I think my midfield and that diamond along with Baggio will edge his side in the middle of the park. I also prefer my centre backs and think that those two key, established partnerships of Rio and Vida at the back and Völler and Klinsmann up top, will make the crucial difference in this game.

I don't really think that your midfield would edge this. Yes you have 2 great playmakers on the field in Schuster - Scholes, but you don't need two playmakers and I'd argue one of them is not going to be able to play to best of his abilities. Scholes - Veron experiment kinda taught us that. I have one arguably better (if only slightly) playmaker in Van Hanegem who is well supported by 2 hard working midfielders. Even Nedved would naturally join in the Midfield battle if required. It's going to be very hard to take the ball either from Hanegem or Gullit. Also Makelele would natural keep tabs on Baggio since he is on the tip of your diamond, not saying that he would nullify him but would limit his effectiveness to some extent.

As for defense, there is nothing between them. Nesta is the standout defender on the pitch, but Rio is not far and Billy is not far from Vidic/Rio either. I would say my defense is better protected with Makelele as pure defensive midfielder is better than Tardelli / Schuster who are playing box to box.

Up front I have a lot of time for Voller - Klinsmann. I really rate them, but there is nothing that would make them better than Eto'o - Rummenigge partnership, while your partnership is more proven, I would say my pair is slightly better, with Rummenigge being standout. Finally wide area threats are my clear advantages. As good Neville is facing Roberto Carlos + Nedved is hard on any full back and Neville don't have a Beckham here to help him out. I wouldn't say things are much different on the other flank. Amoros was a great RB but here he is playing as LB, while he is very good at it, it's not his preferred position and he is facing Rummenigge + Reuter, these 2 are problem areas for your team and where I have edge in the game.
 
I don't really think that your midfield would edge this. Yes you have 2 great playmakers on the field in Schuster - Scholes, but you don't need two playmakers and I'd argue one of them is not going to be able to play to best of his abilities. Scholes - Veron experiment kinda taught us that. I have one arguably better (if only slightly) playmaker in Van Hanegem who is well supported by 2 hard working midfielders. Even Nedved would naturally join in the Midfield battle if required. It's going to be very hard to take the ball either from Hanegem or Gullit. Also Makelele would natural keep tabs on Baggio since he is on the tip of your diamond, not saying that he would nullify him but would limit his effectiveness to some extent.

I think you're misunderstanding Schuster, both in terms of the all round force of a player he was and also the role he is providing in this side. All the "Scholes-Veron experiment" taught Fergie, was that we needed to adjust the way we played the game if we were to drive on in European football. There is no reason a deep lying playmaker cannot dovetail perfectly with a more advanced playmaker, especially when the more advanced player is a great ball carrier, capable of driving forwards, or into wider positions as effortlessly as he was linking play with perfectly judged passing. With a midfield enforcer as fine as Tardelli beside them, these two would flourish.


As for defense, there is nothing between them. Nesta is the standout defender on the pitch, but Rio is not far and Billy is not far from Vidic/Rio either. I would say my defense is better protected with Makelele as pure defensive midfielder is better than Tardelli / Schuster who are playing box to box.

Can't agree with your point on Makalele in any form being even in the same league as Tardelli. What the Italian brings to a side and a midfield simply cannot be underestimated. On the defence you are quite correct that there is little to choose between the two defensive lines in terms of quality, but I just feel the proven combination of Rio, Vidić, Neville would count against you here. That's 3/4 of a first class, established and tested backline.

Up front I have a lot of time for Voller - Klinsmann. I really rate them, but there is nothing that would make them better than Eto'o - Rummenigge partnership, while your partnership is more proven, I would say my pair is slightly better, with Rummenigge being standout. Finally wide area threats are my clear advantages. As good Neville is facing Roberto Carlos + Nedved is hard on any full back and Neville don't have a Beckham here to help him out. I wouldn't say things are much different on the other flank. Amoros was a great RB but here he is playing as LB, while he is very good at it, it's not his preferred position and he is facing Rummenigge + Reuter, these 2 are problem areas for your team and where I have edge in the game.

We've been through the argument about Amoros in every match and it's simply untrue. He played where he was needed by the French national side but was a genuinely equal performer on either side. A rare properly two footed player who was just as effective on the left. There's no argument there.

As for Eto'o - Rummenigge, you're correct that they might be a good partnership. But Völler and Klinsmann were a great partnership. One of the proven all time partnerships and in this all time draft, I think those proven all time partnerships would have to count for something.
 
Gone for Tuppet - very close though.

I agree with a lot of his points and Scholes-Schuster-Baggio-Tardelli does look like slight overkill on the playmaking front to me. I don't think its possible to get the most of any of those players, particularly in a centrally orientated system with limited passing opportunities out wide - which were Scholes' bread and butter in his latter, deep-lying playmaker years.

I also agree with him than Makelele is a better anchor in front of the defence than Tardelli, as that wasn't really Tardelli's game whereas Makelele played that limited holding role throughout his career and was always successful.
 
Here's a little insight into how my formation and our shape affords our side options in attack:

gr6GHAR.gif


As you can see, there are so many options for every player as they bring the ball forward. In the modern era, there have been few centre backs more comfortable than Rio at carrying the ball out from the back and beginning moves from deep. When Scholes gets on the ball at the base of the midfield, the pitch opens up to him with the great movement of Schuster, Baggio, Völler and Klinsmann giving him a wealth of options to pick out the perfect pass from.

paul-scholes-passing-o.gif


Tardelli driving forwards from midfield has the option to link with Schuster, Baggio or to go himself. A really good route I can see happening here is the one-two with Völler to allow the Italian to continue his run into the box.

Rpmw45Y.gif


Schuster in his wider right position, or Baggio in that slightly withdrawn or left position are going to have some real fun here. Getting on the ball, linking well like Schuster did with Maradona at Barca or just running at players for fun. The mercurial talent of the Italian with the all round force that is the Golden God of Germany will be really difficult for our opponents to cope with.

Here we see the real, direct threat of Schuster from almost anywhere on the field:
YpOukC0.gif
ym1HTE1.gif


And here the genius of Baggio, a man who could terrify a defence with a glance and a twinkle of his toes. Majestic first touch, great balance and speed with the ball at his feet. A complete attacker and talisman going forwards:

bNwEZsC.gif
xeuir6V.gif
 
@Theon I don't know if this last post explains a little better how I want to use Scholes as opposed to Schuster or Baggio?
 
I think you're misunderstanding Schuster, both in terms of the all round force of a player he was and also the role he is providing in this side. All the "Scholes-Veron experiment" taught Fergie, was that we needed to adjust the way we played the game if we were to drive on in European football. There is no reason a deep lying playmaker cannot dovetail perfectly with a more advanced playmaker, especially when the more advanced player is a great ball carrier, capable of driving forwards, or into wider positions as effortlessly as he was linking play with perfectly judged passing. With a midfield enforcer as fine as Tardelli beside them, these two would flourish.

Look I am not saying they would hamper each other or anything. Its just that both playmakers would want to go the game through them, and one of them have to give up the ball more than the other. They might work, but IMO they both could not show their best qualities. Now you are right that Schuster is unique and he offers qualities beyond just playmaking but part of his legend is his playmaking abilities, which he can not show if Scholes is the one who is controlling the game.

Can't agree with your point on Makalele in any form being even in the same league as Tardelli. What the Italian brings to a side and a midfield simply cannot be underestimated. On the defence you are quite correct that there is little to choose between the two defensive lines in terms of quality, but I just feel the proven combination of Rio, Vidić, Neville would count against you here. That's 3/4 of a first class, established and tested backline.

Well we'll probably have to agree to disagree here. At no point I am saying that Tardelli is not a better player than Makelele. The reason why he is better is not because of his defensive qualities, but because he was a great box to box player. Sure he was a defense first player like say Keane, but he was never a purely holding midfielder, in that role (and only there) Makelele is a specialist and have better discipline to stick to his man or shield the defense.

As for backline, Vidic - Rio is pretty much equivalent to Costacurta - Nesta, but Retuer is better than Neville and Roberto Carlos is better than Amoros. Overall I think my backline with better protection from Makelele has a slight edge.
 
Well we'll probably have to agree to disagree here. At no point I am saying that Tardelli is not a better player than Makelele. The reason why he is better is not because of his defensive qualities, but because he was a great box to box player. Sure he was a defense first player like say Keane, but he was never a purely holding midfielder, in that role (and only there) Makelele is a specialist and have better discipline to stick to his man or shield the defense.

Yeah that's fair enough - I get what you mean here. I think with the way my side is set up to play, I didn't want to sacrifice that all round ability that Tardelli brings to have a simple sitter in front of the defence. I think our side will dominate the ball and I'm very happy with the industry and effectiveness of Tardelli in that role when we do lose possession.

As for backline, Vidic - Rio is pretty much equivalent to Costacurta - Nesta, but Retuer is better than Neville and Roberto Carlos is better than Amoros. Overall I think my backline with better protection from Makelele has a slight edge.

Again, for the role I'm using him in here I wouldn't take Reuter over Neville, particularly in that proven trio along with Vidic and Rio. I just don't think that understanding and cohesion can be underestimated here. As you said, there is little to choose between the players in these teams so I honestly feel the established partnerships will be telling in the result.
 
De Kromme - Wim van Hanegem

Article-Photo-297x300.jpg


To the Dutch, Willem van Hanegem is considered to be one of the best players in their footballing history. When his name reaches the border, however; it fades. With his emergence being in pre-internet days, the midfielders’ status as a forgotten footballer is unsurprising; Van Hanegem only appeared in a single World Cup (1974); one in which Johan Cruyff’s star shone brightest. Also, aside from a single season in the burgeoning North American Soccer League (NASL), van Hanegem spent his entire career in the Netherlands. If Ajax fans had their talisman in Johan Cruyff, Feyenoord had theirs in Wim van Hanegem – one whose face adorns more items in the De Kuip club shop than that of any other former player.

One morning in late 1960, a coach named Daan van Beek was taking a training session for his team, Velox of Utrecht. During the training, Van Beek noticed a youngster clutching the other side of the fence as he watched his local team. As the session progressed, he noticed that each time one of his players skied the ball over the fence, the youngster would chase after the stray ball and kick it back over the fence. Each time, the pass landed at the feet of a Velox player. Curious, van Beek strolled over to the fence and asked the youngster to participate. The Velox first teamers watched him enter the pitch and as he came into focus, the youngster seemed to be getting bigger and bigger. When he reached them, he stood 6ft and at 94 kilos, he was clearly overweight. His future teammates were unimpressed and they would soon realise that his eye-sight was poor too but despite this, Van Hanegerm turned up the following week and the week after. After each session van Beek was advised that the boy was “Too slow. Too fat. Can’t do anything with his right foot. Too reckless”. It seemed that only van Beek could see something in the youngster midfielder. Slowly however, this belief was rewarded and quickly showed that despite his weight, the technique was impeccable and despite seeing everything as a haze, he could create countless chances with perfectly curving through passes. By 1962, Van Hanegem, now aged 18, was already a starter in the first team and with a nickname that he would carry his whole career. The nickname was ‘De Kromme’ (The Crooked) after the bent passes and bent posture that characterised his play. At this time Velox were a second division side and only the third strongest in Utrecht (behind DOS and Elinkwijk) but despite this, van Hanegem later commented that he never played at a better club in his life.

After he joined Feyenoord, In his first season at De Kuip, van Hanegem won the Eredivisie and the KNVB cup. A year later he shone in a team that became the first Dutch side to win a major European trophy; dispatching holders AC Milan en-route to the final. In the European Cup final of 1969-70, Feyenoord would face the European Champions from three years previous; Jock Stein’s Glasgow Celtic. Believing that, ‘the game always unfolds from the midfield’, Happel decided upon a 4-3-3 formation to best Celtics 4-2-4. The Austrian’s beliefs were proven correct as Wim Jansen, Frans Hasil and van Hanegem proved to be difference at the San Siro and 2-1 extra time victory meant that Feyenoord would become the first Dutch team to win the European Cup, thus heralding a decade of European footballing dominance for the Dutch.

Some of his best performances came in the world cup 1974. In previous years, a Dutch national team comprised of Ajax and Feyenoord players had hamstrung itself due to both almost never being willing to work together as a team. In 1974, however; Ajax and Feyenoord became that team (It was not all harmonious, mind; the squad’s two PSV legends, Jan van Beveren and Willy van der Kuijlen had been left out of the squad at Cruyff’s behest). Being Feyenoord’s captain, Wim van Hanegem’s acceptance of Johan Cruyff’s unquestioned leadership and Rinus Michels Ajax-tested beliefs was one of, if not the main component of making the Dutch experiment a success. Whilst Cruyff’s leadership reinforced the philosophy on the pitch, van Hanegem controlled the tempo of the game and it would be his curving distribution to Cruyff and Rep that would assist the former to walk away with the Best Player of the tournament award. Very little footage exists of van Hanegem’s early years at Feyenoord; all we really have are those seven matches in that World Cup. In that footage we are treated to seeing van Hanegem running with stooped back, grizzly bear-like, hitting the ball toe-first as if it was a balloon. Every pass he makes looks like it has been sliced but each and every one sails over his opponent and lands at a teammate’s foot. Especially in world cup final against Germany, Van Hanegem was outstanding, with Cruyff subdued by Vogts, Hanegem took the reign in his hand and provided a complete midfield performance.

From a "Too slow, Too fat" youngster to the best performer in a world cup final, Throughout his career, van Hanegem had not only proved doubters wrong but had done so through graft and determination. The birthplace of van Hanegem, the province of Zeeland was an area directly affected by the North Sea flood of 1953; a tidal surge which led to the deaths of an estimated 1,835 people and in which 70,000 more required emergency evacuation. From the toil that led to its inception and the adversities it has faced since its creation, the province has a suitable a motto: Luctor et Emergo. It means I Struggle and Emerge.

What better motto to summarise the career of De Kromme.

From - http://www.football-oranje.com/hall-of-fame-wim-van-hanegem/





 
Last edited:
Makelele/Van Hanegem/Gullit versus Tardelli/Scholes/Schuster. Jesus :eek:. Its incredibly difficult to even begin to seperate these two teams, although Roberto Carlos/Nedved look well poised to give Nevillea tough game. That said I'm a bit disappointed that Del Piero hasn't retained his starting role at inside left, particularly given that Carlos will be providing so much width. Nedved vs Del Piero is a tough decision of course, but Im just very high on Del Piero circa 1998 at the minute, and his additional goal threat and set piece ability would offset Baggio's qualities nicely.
I know it was hard to pick any one of them and it comes to one's taste I suppose. I think at his peak Nedved was a better player and a more natural wide player than Del Piero. Del piero certainly offers a bigger goal threat, but with Eto'o - Rummenigge - Gullit I have more than enough of that, and Nedved gives me something different. His work rate and stamina means he would provide lot of freedom to Roberto Carlos to go ahead and attack. Also his natural propensity to drop into midfield areas would help my mid against Diarm's fantastic midfield, especially when Gullit goes up to join the attack. Finally they don't call him Czech Cannon for nothing, as he really had incredible shot power, which gives me a great attacking threat from out of the box. So that was my reasoning, in the end there is not much to it, and Del Piero also would have given me something different.

Finally to relive some fantastic long shots of Furia Ceca -

 
Last edited:
Quite surprised at the score here. I'd be interested to read some of the reasoning of those voting against me.
 
Quite surprised at the score here. I'd be interested to read some of the reasoning of those voting against me.

To be honest, I probably would have voted against your team even in the last round but chickened out in the end when it was already a draw. Being on phone did not help as well.

I think you have tried to sell here that Baggio would also affect the midfield battle, something I don't particularly buy. He is more likely to just pop up with a magical run rather than consistently link up with your 3 CMs to dominate the proceedings. The other 3 are well matched by opposition 3. Tuppet also has the edge in the attack IMO, more so when you consider that his full backs will help him out much more. I am a big fan of Carlos and he normally gets underrated in these drafts.
 
To be honest, I probably would have voted against your team even in the last round but chickened out in the end when it was already a draw. Being on phone did not help as well.

I think you have tried to sell here that Baggio would also affect the midfield battle, something I don't particularly buy. He is more likely to just pop up with a magical run rather than consistently link up with your 3 CMs to dominate the proceedings. The other 3 are well matched by opposition 3. Tuppet also has the edge in the attack IMO, more so when you consider that his full backs will help him out much more. I am a big fan of Carlos and he normally gets underrated in these drafts.

I don't think I've sold Baggio as a midfielder. I've clearly said he's employed as a false 9.5 which is definitely his best role. He will drop deep though and he will link brilliantly with Schuster who was brilliant linking with a very famous player in exactly that role.

With Baggio in that role, I can't see their attack having the edge over the Italian and that world class partnership up front. Especially with Schuster and Tardelli supporting from deep and Amoros, who is up there with any full back on the pitch, on the left.
 
I don't think I've sold Baggio as a midfielder. I've clearly said he's employed as a false 9.5 which is definitely his best role. He will drop deep though and he will link brilliantly with Schuster who was brilliant linking with a very famous player in exactly that role.

With Baggio in that role, I can't see their attack having the edge over the Italian and that world class partnership up front. Especially with Schuster and Tardelli supporting from deep and Amoros, who is up there with any full back on the pitch, on the left.
Baggio is indeed a 9.5 so agree there, my bad if you did not make him out to be a definite part of midfield diamond. Disagree on Amoros being equal to Carlos on left. Anyway I will leave this between you and Tuppet
 
I don't think I've sold Baggio as a midfielder. I've clearly said he's employed as a false 9.5 which is definitely his best role. He will drop deep though and he will link brilliantly with Schuster who was brilliant linking with a very famous player in exactly that role.

With Baggio in that role, I can't see their attack having the edge over the Italian and that world class partnership up front. Especially with Schuster and Tardelli supporting from deep and Amoros, who is up there with any full back on the pitch, on the left.

Also not sure if the last match is that relevant here. I have significantly strengthened my defence and our opponents are a very different team. For what it's worth, I actually think we are far better set up to play this side than we were Anto's team in the last round.
 
Also not sure if the last match is that relevant here. I have significantly strengthened my defence and our opponents are a very different team. For what it's worth, I actually think we are far better set up to play this side than we were Anto's team in the last round.
That is right, you have addressed your primary weakness of central defense. But I am not sure why you would think that you are better setup against us. Our winger + wingbacks are outstanding and we definitely have upper hand there.

Your not having proper wingers also have a significant impact on Scholes, who in his deep playmaker role loved to find widemen and spread the game, with his passing. Here it would be more difficult. Tardelli has a hard job already in minding Gullit who is the outstanding number 10 on the pitch. He would not be able to provide width in the same way a winger does. As for Schuster, taking a ball and drifting to wide areas was his game, because he was the playmaker of the team. Staying wide and waiting for Scholes pass is just not his game. You would say that they would dovetail brilliantly but I just dont see it happening. One of them is bound to take the hit, of not having the game going through them.
 
That is right, you have addressed your primary weakness of central defense. But I am not sure why you would think that you are better setup against us. Our winger + wingbacks are outstanding and we definitely have upper hand there.

Because while you have good fullbacks, I don't think you have quite the same quality in wide areas (fullbacks and attackers) that Anto did. Obviously your fullbacks will still be dangerous but in terms of actual team shape, you're not that different to ourselves with Rummenigge in particular, not offering great width from the position you have him in up top.

Your not having proper wingers also have a significant impact on Scholes, who in his deep playmaker role loved to find widemen and spread the game, with his passing. Here it would be more difficult. Tardelli has a hard job already in minding Gullit who is the outstanding number 10 on the pitch. He would not be able to provide width in the same way a winger does. As for Schuster, taking a ball and drifting to wide areas was his game, because he was the playmaker of the team. Staying wide and waiting for Scholes pass is just not his game. You would say that they would dovetail brilliantly but I just dont see it happening. One of them is bound to take the hit, of not having the game going through them.

I think you're underestimating the movement of Klinsmann and in particular Völler there. Both were really mobile forwards who thrived in pulling out into wider areas to receive the ball. When you factor in the forward movement of Schuster on the right (who will look to get wide when Scholes is receiving the ball, whether or not his natural game is to hug the touchline) and Amoros on the left, I think there will be plenty for Scholes to work with. It's not as if he can't pick out a wondrous ball through the middle or over the top either!
 
Its easy to forget how absolutely awesome Gullit was at his peak. A physical force of nature with fantastic technique and stamina that would make him run all day. Pace, heading, shooting be in a midfield role, a second striker, or even as a sweeper, Gullit was imperious. If anyone has not watched these, I would highly recommend them, not just for the draft but in general -



 
You'll get no arguments from me there. Fabulous player and our team will be working hard to ensure he sees as little of the ball as we can manage.
 
Because while you have good fullbacks, I don't think you have quite the same quality in wide areas (fullbacks and attackers) that Anto did. Obviously your fullbacks will still be dangerous but in terms of actual team shape, you're not that different to ourselves with Rummenigge in particular, not offering great width from the position you have him in up top.

I won't really go into comparing Our team and Anto's team, that was a different game and a different team.

I think you're underestimating the movement of Klinsmann and in particular Völler there. Both were really mobile forwards who thrived in pulling out into wider areas to receive the ball. When you factor in the forward movement of Schuster on the right (who will look to get wide when Scholes is receiving the ball, whether or not his natural game is to hug the touchline) and Amoros on the left, I think there will be plenty for Scholes to work with. It's not as if he can't pick out a wondrous ball through the middle or over the top either!

I honestly think this is problematic and you are not getting the best of Schuster. Reducing him to stay wide and receive passes from Scholes, while making Scholes the primary conductor of the game is just not going to sit well with him as well. But we've discussed this enough and we can see what voters think about it. I am only raising this issue, because you have these stellar playmakers in the team (Even Tardelli was a pretty good playmaker), but there is only one ball and its very very hard for more than one playmaker to exist in the team without taking away from others game. If Schuster is playing the way you are saying he is playing, I would say that does not give you prime Schuster. Its like someone picking Giggs and play him as a center midfielder (well not quite but thats the idea).
 
I think there will be plenty for Scholes to work with. It's not as if he can't pick out a wondrous ball through the middle or over the top either!
Like this against an Italian centre-half pairing including Costacurta?

 
I honestly think this is problematic and you are not getting the best of Schuster. Reducing him to stay wide and receive passes from Scholes, while making Scholes the primary conductor of the game is just not going to sit well with him as well. But we've discussed this enough and we can see what voters think about it. I am only raising this issue, because you have these stellar playmakers in the team (Even Tardelli was a pretty good playmaker), but there is only one ball and its very very hard for more than a few playmakers to exist in the team without taking away from others game. If Schuster is playing the way you are saying he is playing, I would say that does not give you prime Schuster. Its like someone picking Giggs and play him as a center midfielder (well not quite but thats the idea).

It's a fair argument but Schuster isn't going to be hanging out wide, waiting for Scholes because he was never that sort of player. He'll get on the ball in his own right and effect the game in the middle of the park, linking with Baggio, Tardelli and yes, even Scholes who is more than just a deep sitting quarter back. It just adds more than one facet to our play and to our attack.

Making your midfield and defence decide whether the ball is going to be carried at them through Tardelli or Schuster, passed through them by any combination of our front 6, lifted over them or around them by Scholes or magicked between them by Baggio is no bad thing. No side can win a game like this with just a Scholes or a Pirlo sitting back and directing every attack. There has to be variety and playmaking elsewhere.
 
Its just that both playmakers would want to go the game through them, and one of them have to give up the ball more than the other. They might work, but IMO they both could not show their best qualities. Now you are right that Schuster is unique and he offers qualities beyond just playmaking but part of his legend is his playmaking abilities, which he can not show if Scholes is the one who is controlling the game.

That might have been an issue if he was using post injury or the libero version of Schuster, as it stands the 1980 version was more of a dynamic attacking midfielder than a dictating midfielder. If you wanted a more 'pure' playmaker, it would have made more sense to use the other two versions of Schuster and this version of Schuster wasn't a dominant playmaker, who would have been at loggerheads with Scholes. Let's not forget how he worked pretty well with Hansi Müller in the Euro 1980s and the more direct Maradona in Barca during the early 1980s. The 1980 Schuster doesn't need the game to go through him like Scholes here will.

Your not having proper wingers also have a significant impact on Scholes, who in his deep playmaker role loved to find widemen and spread the game, with his passing.

That is a fairly good point indeed, Scholes did excel playing all those lovely back-spinned pinged balls to the wingers. However, what impressed me more than those long raking diagonal balls, was his movement, awareness and intelligence - quite apt that his nickname was Sat Nav. He wasn't just about spreading the ball to wide players but his movement and ability to play one-twos and his vertical balls were quite simply brilliant. The key aspect would be to have runners and options for him on the ball and he does have plenty here with that extremely mobile front duo and the ubiquitous Schuster.



His ability to play that vertical pass is quite underrated if anything and his movement off the ball to take out hordes of players is just :eek:. Quite shocking the number of times our players fluffed their chances in that vid :lol:.
 
Like this against an Italian centre-half pairing including Costacurta?



I could kiss you. I spent ages looking for this earlier but for some strange reason, had it in my head it was Andy Cole and not Ian Wright who scored!

That goal speaks volumes about this match. Klinsmann would lap that supply up all day long.
 
Tuppets front 5 is incredible, some of my favourite players and they all seem like they would fit this set up and compliment each other really well - well done!
 
Like this against an Italian centre-half pairing including Costacurta?


I love Scholes, he can do this and then some. Its just about the impact on his game. Finding wingers and spreading play was a big part of his game, but sure he is pretty good at playing vertical balls as well. I just wish I had some clip Van Hanegem splitting Rio - Vidic :) .
 
I love Scholes, he can do this and then some. Its just about the impact on his game. Finding wingers and spreading play was a big part of his game, but sure he is pretty good at playing vertical balls as well. I just wish I had some clip Van Hanegem splitting Rio - Vidic :) .
You've always got this though...

 
Here's a gif of that Scholes ball against Costacurta for anyone disinclined to watch the video:

4VYAOhc.gif


It just goes to show how hard it is for a defensive line to face Scholes when they are not sure if they should be pushing up to counter the likes of Baggio, Schuster and Tardelli, or whether they should be following the movement and harrying of our front two, or whether they should be dropping deep.

Both Klinsmann or Völler would be deadly with that sort of ball.
 
You've always got this though...



No doubt Eto'o will be dangerous here. But we all know where that match was won and lost and it wasn't because of Eto'o or the United defence.

In this game, Eto'o isn't playing alongside Xavi, Iniesta, Henry and Messi and Scholes isn't playing alongside Anderson and Ryan Giggs in a 3 man midfield. Very, very different.
 
I was actually posting this -



Doesn't mean anything though all these are very different games, and Diarm is no Moyes.


Indeed. And I won't be facing Chelsea without Rio Ferdinand, without my two first choice strikers and with Chris Smalling playing almost a half of football at left back!

Carrick won't be playing at centre back either!!!
 
Indeed. And I won't be facing Chelsea without Rio Ferdinand, without my two first choice strikers and with Chris Smalling playing almost a half of football at left back!

Carrick won't be playing at centre back either!!!
True that :) . As I was saying these one off instances don't really mean that much, Scholes can make a world class long ball, Van hanegem can do the same and with Gullit - Eto'o - Rumminegge, my attack has many ways to punish the opposition defense. Something like this is a very plausible scenario Hanegem - Gullit.

MY9I0UW.gif

Bottom line for me is that our teams are pretty much equal all things considered. In Rumminegge and Baggio we have extra ordinary attackers while in Van Hanegem and Scholes we have 2 classic playmakers. I would say Gullit is better than Schuster in that he is playing his best role and is relatively free, also Makelele as a specialist defensive midfielder would contribute more in defending than Tardelli. In a sense, you have more general multi-faceted players and I have more specialists in their best roles.

Although I still think Roberto Carlos + Nedved against Neville is a great route. Carlos might well be the difference maker in this game, with his supply of deep world class crosses to Gullit and Rummenigge. And he is a class above anything you have on the wings.
 
I think with players as good as Schuster and Tardelli, you can't just pigeonhole them into a "best position" because they were so good wherever they played. The two roles they are employed in tody are absolutely ideal and give our side massive workrate, balance and technique in midfield.

In a game of this quality, I'll take the multifaceted players over the specialist every time because those players are the exact guys who make the difference in the tightest of games.

Baggio did it in 94, Schuster against Madrid in 82/83, Voller in the World Cup final in 1990, Klinsmann in that crucial match againt Gullit's Holland in that tournament, Scholes against Barcelona or AC Milan and of course Tardelli in the World Cup final of 1982.

My side contains the big game men who can and have stepped up to the plate at key moments in football history.