Annah/Swe 48-58 VS Enigma - NT peak draft

[Enigma_87]

I agree with that. I'd just prefer to see Pele further forward even in his '70 incarnation.

Maybe that's more him in his 1958 incarnation where he played off Vava. He was probably 9 and a half there. At his peak he often said he envisioned himself more as a midfielder than attacker.



Around 3rd minute mark - he says he was not a CF and was the third man in attack - helped the midfield a lot, etc.

Full quote from him:

... I didn't know God would give me such a gift, that is, to score more than 1000 goals. I was not a center forward. I used to play as the third man. I used to help the midfielders. I used to play coming from behind, so... I was lucky to be in a very good moment and to have great teammates and that's why I kept scoring.

It's hard to explain, because..I'm quite sure I have even more assists than goals scored in my career...

 

[Annahnomoss]

Fun facts! Grenoli never lost a competitive match for Sweden together. It took until the 1958 final for Liedholm and Gren to first lose a competitive international match.

1958-06-29 Sverige - Brasilien 2 - 5 Herrar A VM
1958-06-24 Sverige - Tyskland 3 - 1 Herrar A VM
1958-06-19 Sverige - Sovjet 2 - 0 Herrar A VM
1958-06-12 Sverige - Ungern 2 - 1 Herrar A VM
1958-06-08 Sverige - Mexiko 3 - 0 Herrar A VM
1949-06-02 Sverige - Irland 3 - 1 Herrar A VM-kval
1948-08-13 Sverige - Jugoslavien 3 - 1 Herrar OS
1948-08-10 Sverige - Danmark 4 - 2 Herrar OS
1948-08-05 Sverige - Korea 12 - 0 Herrar OS
1948-08-02 Sverige - Österrike 3 - 0 Herrar OS

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

I think Enigma's team is overly defensive. Can't think of what Moore will add, that Beckenbauer ahead of the defence can't do. Back 4 with Kaizer and Didi should be sufficient and he could have done with someone like Neeskens in the middle.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

My point was that it's at least odd not to have a very creative player as a 10 in a 3412

Well, that surely depends on precisely what players you field. If he had gone with some sort of super direct, clearly non-creative (so to speak) player in a standard 10 role - then sure, it would demand an explanation.

Pelé is playing his '70 role, though - which isn't that of a standard 10. So, unless you insist that he needs a standard 10 in this particular formation, I don't see a problem with it.

 

[Enigma_87]

I think Enigma's team is overly defensive. Can't think of what Moore will add, that Beckenbauer ahead of the defence can't do. Back 4 with Kaizer and Didi should be sufficient and he could have done with someone like Neeskens in the middle.

I think Beckenbauer / Didi is very complimentary pairing. Beckenbauer as a dynamic midfielder here.

Moore is playing in defence while Beckenbauer in midfield so essentially they would cover different parts of the pitch. I'm playing with wing backs so naturally when one of the RCB or LCB goes to cover the wing, Moore will cover for him in the center, while Beckenbauer will cover the AM/#10 position.

Wouldn't say overly defensively but really solid at the back. All teams left are more central oriented so to have a great core with 4 of the best defensive players in the game - Kaiser, Moore, Figueroa, Maldini forming that rectangular when defending in front and around the box is key in most match ups. This one included with Annah saturating the middle when on the ball.

Beckenbauer also IMO is superior player to Neeskens(who was actually my second best choice after him for that position) in every sense even supporting the attack in his forays.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Also in the defense Facchetti and Amoros will be left alone out wide towards the corner flag while the team remains very low with Voronin/Rijkaard/Kohler/Gustavsson/Djalma in the box. The goal is to let them provide crosses as the team is so strong in that regard.

I'm not sold on this.

It sounds almost like you're willing to let his wingbacks have the run of their flanks (when they get forward) - which would be borderline suicidal.

Facchetti, in particular, won't simply mechanically bomb down to the corner flank to cross if nobody's paying him any attention. I doubt you can afford to have Rijkaard/Voronin crowd the box: You can plausibly choose not to positively worry about his wingbacks, but you (obviously) can't ignore them either.

Put it like this: If you're banking on Facchetti to conform to your plan (crossing mechanically into a crowded box), I'm almost certain you will be in for a nasty surprise.

 

[Annahnomoss]

I'm not sold on this.

It sounds almost like you're willing to let his wingbacks have the run of their flanks (when they get forward) - which would be borderline suicidal.

Facchetti, in particular, won't simply mechanically bomb down to the corner flank to cross if nobody's paying him any attention. I doubt you can afford to have Rijkaard/Voronin crowd the box: You can plausibly choose not to positively worry about his wingbacks, but you (obviously) can't ignore them either.

Put it like this: If you're banking on Facchetti to conform to your plan (crossing mechanically into a crowded box), I'm almost certain you will be in for a nasty surprise.

It may very well be. That is how I'd interpret the WM against wing backs though as if they get dragged out wide there'd be acres of space in the middle. I believe their primary focus would have to be the front three in this case and the full backs would be the nasty surprise you talk about!

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

Great teams. To me it looks like Enigma is playing into Annah's game plan a bit with the 5 at the back and only having wing backs for most of the width. I think the side would be stronger overall if one of the CBs (probably Moore) was removed for another midfielder. That said, its hard to also see Muller and Pele being kept quiet here.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

I think Beckenbauer / Didi is very complimentary pairing. Beckenbauer as a dynamic midfielder here.

Moore is playing in defence while Beckenbauer in midfield so essentially they would cover different parts of the pitch. I'm playing with wing backs so naturally when one of the RCB or LCB goes to cover the wing, Moore will cover for him in the center, while Beckenbauer will cover the AM/#10 position.

Wouldn't say overly defensively but really solid at the back. All teams left are more central oriented so to have a great core with 4 of the best defensive players in the game - Kaiser, Moore, Figueroa, Maldini forming that rectangular when defending in front and around the box is key in most match ups. This one included with Annah saturating the middle when on the ball.

Beckenbauer also IMO is superior player to Neeskens(who was actually my second best choice after him for that position) in every sense even supporting the attack in his forays.

I like Beckenbauer/Didi combo. It's just not the back 3 which I find a bit unconvincing.

..............Didi....Beckenbauer..........
Facchetti...Maldini...Figueroa...Amoros

is more than sufficient with Kaizer dropping back and moving ahead as he feels fit. Adding Moore looks to be an overkill since you have already chosen the 1970 version of Beckenbauer. With '66 version, I can understand inclusion of Moore, but not really necessary with the 1970 version.

And if your opponent's are central oriented why do you need sidebacks? Surely 2 DM smack in front of defence works better than having wide defenders?

I think I can buy this against Annah's team to counter this front 5, but agaisnt another central oriented team, it'd not be optimal at all.

 

[Annahnomoss]

Great teams. To me it looks like Enigma is playing into Annah's game plan a bit with the 5 at the back and only having wing backs for most of the width. I think the side would be stronger overall if one of the CBs (probably Moore) was removed for another midfielder. That said, its hard to also see Muller and Pele being kept quiet here.

I think so too. But like you said, there is no chance that Pele and Muller wouldn't find a way to score. Probably more than once to be frank and while I think the Swedes would certainly score themselves as well it would be hard to out do Enigma. Stoichkov would play a key role here trying to act as a tactical pawn with his work rate and using the flanks to make sure Muller and Pele won't face a completely narrow defensive line, which even for them would have been hard to overcome.

 

[Annahnomoss]

The people voting, what kind of score line do you see? @harms etc

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

I think so too. But like you said, there is no chance that Pele and Muller wouldn't find a way to score. Probably more than once to be frank and while I think the Swedes would certainly score themselves as well it would be hard to out do Enigma. Stoichkov would play a key role here trying to act as a tactical pawn with his work rate and using the flanks to make sure Muller and Pele won't face a completely narrow defensive line, which even for them would have been hard to overcome.

Yeah, for me the thing about the WM that confuses some people is name "inside-forward". At least in the Chapman Arsenal version, the inside forwards played in a way that is best described in modern terms as "box to box". Not really a forward at all. So Moore just looks redundant against a WM. What is really needed to counter that is another box to box midfielder. Replacing Moore with Neeskens and i could see Enigma controlling the midfield but I don't think the 5 at the back works to counter a proper WM with inside "box to box" players.

 

[Annahnomoss]

Yeah, for me the thing about the WM that confuses some people is name "inside-forward". At least in the Chapman Arsenal version, the inside forwards played in a way that is best described in modern terms as "box to box". Not really a forward at all. So Moore just looks redundant against a WM. What is really needed to counter that is another box to box midfielder. Replacing Moore with Neeskens and i could see Enigma controlling the midfield but I don't think the 5 at the back works to counter a proper WM with inside "box to box" players.

Agreed. Most often defensively limited but pure genius going forward as was seen when Gren and Liedholm scored 18 each in the league alone. Defensively very limited to positional defending from what I've seen. Matthäus highest scoring season was 16 in the league and there is a double threat from the two of them.

 

[Enigma_87]

I like Beckenbauer/Didi combo. It's just not the back 3 which I find a bit unconvincing.

..............Didi....Beckenbauer..........
Facchetti...Maldini...Figueroa...Amoros

is more than sufficient with Kaizer dropping back and moving ahead as he feels fit. Adding Moore looks to be an overkill since you have already chosen the 1970 version of Beckenbauer. With '66 version, I can understand inclusion of Moore, but not really necessary with the 1970 version.

And if your opponent's are central oriented why do you need sidebacks? Surely 2 DM smack in front of defence works better than having wide defenders?

I think I can buy this against Annah's team to counter this front 5, but agaisnt another central oriented team, it'd not be optimal at all.

5-3-2 with Pele, Stoichkov and Muller in the attack makes that front three more imposing IMO. Also it is really perfect for Stoichkov to fill the exact 94' role where he hovered all around the attack and looked for spaces. While the LWF was more natural to his game, in this formation he is close to that 94' form as you get and makes him even a greater danger with Facchetti overlapping on the side.

I can understand a 4-2-3-1 approach and of course I thought of that but IMO with Moore as last line of defence makes the it even harder for some of the great attackers to find space and score. I'll make some gifs probably on the mechanics defensively, but basically it's what I've explained above.

Generally the idea is to have 3 at the back not to be susceptible to counters with Moore pushing up in possession in the hole, when Beckenbauer moves forward. There won't be any free space in the center for the opposition forwards and while Figueroa most of the cases takes care for Nordahl, WM of what Annah opted gets the ball wide while putting attackers in the box. I'd rather have additional defender in the box rather than a midfielder.

Having only Beckenbauer doing the running through the lines would mean an awful lot of work to do which would negate the effect he can have on the midfield.

The only negative I can see in playing against Barca 4-3-3 type of press but then again even the defenders in Moore, Maldini and Figueroa are technically excellent that to bother them.

There are always variants of course but against another central oriented attacking team it's exactly the same I see it - saturating the center with defensively great players who have specific zones and responsibilities operating in specific ways. For example against another 5-3-2 the full backs will pick the full backs, one of the CB's will mark the opposition forward, while the other offers protection if the ball is wide, Beckenbauer will look for the #10, while Moore is the last line of defence and would cover if someone gets beaten not to open up space and create numerical advantage in attack.

Both full backs are excellent in attack, Facchetti for example scored nearly 100 goals in his career and his distribution is also admirable. With both of them running into space and 3 highly mobile forwards in Stoichkov, Pele and Muller, support of Beckenbauer and Didi I don't believe this side lacks anything in attack, quite the opposite.

 

[Enigma_87]

Yeah, for me the thing about the WM that confuses some people is name "inside-forward". At least in the Chapman Arsenal version, the inside forwards played in a way that is best described in modern terms as "box to box". Not really a forward at all. So Moore just looks redundant against a WM. What is really needed to counter that is another box to box midfielder. Replacing Moore with Neeskens and i could see Enigma controlling the midfield but I don't think the 5 at the back works to counter a proper WM with inside "box to box" players.

I think it's a moot point to be honest. Annah has already given up possession and control by playing counter attacking game, so either way we will have most of the ball without the need to battle it out. He has a clear gameplan that would require pulling our team forward, hence an additional midfielder in the center will only clutter the already congested space, while with 2 wing backs focused wide we will open up more space for Beckenbauer, Didi and Pele to use. Neeskens in for Moore would be more of a diamond in terms of formation and I doubt it will give us anything more out wide, rather than exactly the opposite.

There are different types of WM, so naturally a higher line possession based WM would look different and I'd have different approach to the game, but I don't see one here.

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

I think it's a moot point to be honest. Annah has already given up possession and control by playing counter attacking game, so either way we will have most of the ball without the need to battle it out. He has a clear gameplan that would require pulling our team forward, hence an additional midfielder in the center will only clutter the already congested space, while with 2 wing backs focused wide we will open up more space for Beckenbauer, Didi and Pele to use. Neeskens in for Moore would be more of a diamond in terms of formation and I doubt it will give us anything more out wide, rather than exactly the opposite.

There are different types of WM, so naturally a higher line possession based WM would look different and I'd have different approach to the game, but I don't see one here.

Annah style is Direct, Flood-the-box while you described yours as Quick direct tempo
I don't see how he has already given up possession or how there is no need to battle it out.

 

[Enigma_87]

Annah style is Direct, Flood-the-box while you described yours as Quick direct tempo
I don't see how he has already given up possession or how there is no need to battle it out.

Just below that:

• Nacka has the ball and looks for an early cross - Liedholm and Gren bombards in to the box for the cross. Hamrin makes a run to the second post.
  
• Hamrin has the ball and looks to beat his marker - Liedholm and Gren bombards in to the box for the cross or cut back pass. Skoglund makes a run in to the box from his flank.
• Liedholm/Gren leads the counter through their silky mix of dribbling and playmaking. Skoglund and Hamrin both makes runs towards goal from their wings while Nordahl finds space in the box.

and below:

So to clarify. Again Raynors side would not have an answer to Facchetti and Amoros and will instead let them have the ball out wide while Rijkaard and Voronin falls down in to the box with Liedholm and Gren just outside of it. Hamrin, Nordahl and Skoglund will purely focus on the counter to take advantage of the space behind the wing backs.

I'm happy to not face the 4-2-3-1 where the wing threat of his side was supreme which would be hard for a WM formation to deal with. Now my centrally focused defensive five will be a wall for his also centrally oriented attack.

When Maldini/Figueroa steps out towards Skoglund and Hamrin, Liedholm and Gren will storm straight in to the box to flood the area and Moore will have a hard time dealing with Nordahl, Liedholm, Gren and the opposite winger.

to me that suggests focusing on counter attacking football.

The idea behind quick direct tempo is exactly that look for the goal and open up spaces, not tire the opponent with possession ala Barca/LvG. Also just to add, I'm not basing our gameplan on possession by the means of it, it's just how I envision the game would go against more counter attacking focused opponent.

 

[Annahnomoss]

Nacka and Hamrin had a wonderful partnership. Nacka was more involved in the build up/playmaking but also had a marvellous cross on him. Together they were similar to Robben and Ribery but classical versions.

He's a fantastic option for a team who wants a real dribbling threat from out wide but also provides genuine width and has a great passing range. In his peak as good as Hamrin but with his different style.

 

[Annahnomoss]

Just below that:

and below:


to me that suggests focusing on counter attacking football.

The idea behind quick direct tempo is exactly that look for the goal and open up spaces, not tire the opponent with possession ala Barca/LvG. Also just to add, I'm not basing our gameplan on possession by the means of it, it's just how I envision the game would go against more counter attacking focused opponent.

Sort of depends. Back in those days possession had no value and teams tried to attack as direct as they could and with Hamrin/Skoglund and Gren/Liedholm I believe it would be successful. In the build up Voronin and Liedholm had great passing ranges and would setup fast counters with ease and Djalma Santos is a great asset in that regard as well.

The only reason they'd have possession for extended periods would be if they are completely shut out and nothing is working going forward, which I can't see being the case. So it is probably fair to say you'd see more time on the ball..

 

[Enigma_87]

@Annahnomoss I'd love to see a piece (probably in a more modern draft) on the 94' side as well:



Brolin at the time was one of my favs, unfortunately he couldn't capitalize on club level and generally keep that 94' level throughout his career.

 

[Theon]

I think Enigma's team is overly defensive. Can't think of what Moore will add, that Beckenbauer ahead of the defence can't do.

I actually think this is a good point - it was my first thought when looking at the Enigma's team. The back five does look overly defensive.

I think Enigma should definitely play Moore as he was the best of the bunch but he wasn't a libero in 1966.

Obviously Moore could play in the middle of a back three (as he has the skillset to do so) but I don't think he would ever be overly adventurous in that role (2 goals in 108 games probably attests to that).

 

[Enigma_87]

Sort of depends. Back in those days possession had no value and teams tried to attack as direct as they could and with Hamrin/Skoglund and Gren/Liedholm I believe it would be successful. In the build up Voronin and Liedholm had great passing ranges and would setup fast counters with ease and Djalma Santos is a great asset in that regard as well.

The only reason they'd have possession for extended periods would be if they are completely shut out and nothing is working going forward, which I can't see being the case. So it is probably fair to say you'd see more time on the ball..

I thought it would pan that way, otherwise I also think exchanging possession with turnovers and generally open play would suit my forward line even better with more space to operate in.

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

Just below that:

and below:


to me that suggests focusing on counter attacking football.

The idea behind quick direct tempo is exactly that look for the goal and open up spaces, not tire the opponent with possession ala Barca/LvG. Also just to add, I'm not basing our gameplan on possession by the means of it, it's just how I envision the game would go against more counter attacking focused opponent.

I don't think I understand your point so lets just say we disagree. I don't feel a 3/5 at the back tactic is the best choice against Annah's WM and you would be better off with one less CB. You do, fair play.

 

[Annahnomoss]

@Annahnomoss I'd love to see a piece (probably in a more modern draft) on the 94' side as well:



Brolin at the time was one of my favs, unfortunately he couldn't capitalize on club level and generally keep that 94' level throughout his career.

Brolin had a great club career as well and kept that sort of level for Sundsvall/Norrköping and then Parma as well. But you have to remember that he was only 20 when he signed for Parma and was improving a lot as a player. In the World Cup the man was just 24 years old and already one of the best players in the world and then the injuries shattered his career completely.

Injury[edit]
On 16 November 1994 at the Råsunda Stadion in Stockholm, Brolin had broken his foot in a qualifier for UEFA Euro 1996. At the time of his injury, Parma were two points clear at the top of the 1994–95 Serie A league table. By the time he returned on 23 April 1995, however, Parma were eight points behind leaders and eventual champions Juventus.

 

[Enigma_87]

I actually think this is a good point - it was my first thought when looking at the Enigma's team. The back five does look overly defensive.

I think Enigma should definitely play Moore as he was the best of the bunch but he wasn't a libero in 1966.

Obviously Moore could play in the middle of a back three (as he has the skillset to do so) but I don't think he would ever be overly adventurous in that role (2 goals in 108 games probably attests to that).

I disagree. Here's an excerpt of how Moore played in that WC:

But it was his role in the build-up to England's first goal that caught the eye of Jamie Carragher on Monday Night Football. With the home side a goal down and struggling for the breakthrough, it was Moore who sparked the equaliser. "It comes from Captain Fantastic, Bobby Moore," said Carragher.

With England in possession in midfield, Moore stepped out from the back to offer a pass to Sir Bobby Charlton. "This is what's different now," explained Carragher. "Normally a centre-back wins that ball and stays where he is. He makes the extra man in midfield."

furthermore

Moore won a free-kick and then got up to take it - finding the head of Hurst. "It's the reaction," added Carragher. "How quickly he's trying to pick the ball up. He's not talking to the referee or getting involved with the opposition. He's looking to get the game started quickly."

That was the first of two assists by Moore. The second was even more remarkable. With his team defending a 3-2 lead in extra-time, the England skipper dealt with a ball into the box and sprang the attack for Hurst to complete his hat-trick.

The touch map and stats from the game highlight what a special performance he put in that afternoon at Wembley. Moore completed 64 passes, more than anyone else on the pitch, with a passing accuracy of 93 per cent - also better than any player on either side.

"He was everywhere," added Carragher. "The number of successful passes for a centre-back and more touches than anyone on the pitch. That sums him up. It shows the influence of why he's revered and not just in this country. You are talking about one of the all-time greats."

 

[Enigma_87]

Brolin had a great club career as well and kept that sort of level for Sundsvall/Norrköping and then Parma as well. But you have to remember that he was only 20 when he signed for Parma and was improving a lot as a player. In the World Cup the man was just 24 years old and already one of the best players in the world and then the injuries shattered his career completely.

Injury[edit]
On 16 November 1994 at the Råsunda Stadion in Stockholm, Brolin had broken his foot in a qualifier for UEFA Euro 1996. At the time of his injury, Parma were two points clear at the top of the 1994–95 Serie A league table. By the time he returned on 23 April 1995, however, Parma were eight points behind leaders and eventual champions Juventus.

Yeah indeed. I remember Parma getting Stoichkov and his injuries prompted his exit, while at that time 26/27 years, he should've been getting to his peak. Thought he could hit even bigger career high if it wasn't for those injuries.

 

[Enigma_87]

I don't think I understand your point so lets just say we disagree. I don't feel a 3/5 at the back tactic is the best choice against Annah's WM and you would be better off with one less CB. You do, fair play.

Cheers, I do understand your position, so point taken mate.

 

[Annahnomoss]

Yeah indeed. I remember Parma getting Stoichkov and his injuries prompted his exit, while at that time 26/27 years, he should've been getting to his peak. Thought he could hit even bigger career high if it wasn't for those injuries.

Wasn't he 29-30 in 1995-96?

 

[Enigma_87]

Wasn't he 29-30 in 1995-96?

nah, was couple years younger than Stoichkov and Balakov at the WC so think (without checking to so maybe wrong) in the middle of his 20's.

EDIT: Just checked born 69 end of the year.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

It may very well be. That is how I'd interpret the WM against wing backs though as if they get dragged out wide there'd be acres of space in the middle. I believe their primary focus would have to be the front three in this case and the full backs would be the nasty surprise you talk about!

Well, I appreciate that you're sticking to a certain script. But the original setup is much more rigid than any modern one, which means that you will necessarily struggle against many attacking patterns if you simply go with a 1950s approach.

It seems to me as though you'd happily let Facchetti go nuts, almost, because dealing with him isn't feasible if you want the team to play realistically - which is either admirable or completely crazy depending on how you look at it.

 

[Annahnomoss]

nah, was couple years younger than Stoichkov and Balakov at the WC so think (without checking to so maybe wrong) in the middle of his 20's.

EDIT: Just checked born 69 end of the year.

Thought you referred to Stoichkov my bad.

 

[Theon]

I disagree. Here's an excerpt of how Moore played in that WC:

You disagree that he wasn't a libero in 1966?

I don't think Moore was ever a libero really. He was great on the ball but I don't think he broke forward that often. That's not a criticism by the way, he was just more than anything else an excellent defender.

Those quotes are fine but we may as well just look at the game:



It was an incredible performance and one of the best from a defender in the World Cup. Still though I wouldn't say that he was a libero - it was a fluid team and the whole English line pushed up at times, but Moore looks to me generally to stick to the LCB position in the English back four.

Like I say I think he has the skill set to play as a libero in a back five (so no qualms there) - I just agree with Edgar/OneNil that it may be slightly defensive and an extra midfielder would have worked well. He was never a rampaging defender who would look to break forward into the box.

That's always been my opinion of him at least.

 

[Annahnomoss]

Well, I appreciate that you're sticking to a certain script. But the original setup is much more rigid than any modern one, which means that you will necessarily struggle against many attacking patterns if you simply go with a 1950s approach.

It seems to me as though you'd happily let Facchetti go nuts, almost, because dealing with him isn't feasible if you want the team to play realistically - which is either admirable or completely crazy depending on how you look at it.

That was what I wanted! Portray the team as it is and nothing more. I'm happy with reaching the semis!

 

[Moby]

You disagree that he wasn't a libero in 1966?

I don't think Moore was ever a libero really. He was great on the ball but I don't think he broke forward that often. That's not a criticism by the way, he was just more than anything else an excellent defender.

Those quotes are fine but we may as well just look at the game:



It was an incredible performance and one of the best from a defender in the World Cup. Still though I wouldn't say that he was a libero - it was a fluid team and the whole English line pushed up at times, but Moore looks to me generally to stick to the LCB position in the English back four.

Like I say I think he has the skill set to play as a libero in a back five (so no qualms there) - I just agree with Edgar/OneNil that it may be slightly defensive and an extra midfielder would have worked well. He was never a rampaging defender who would look to break forward into the box.

That's always been my opinion of him at least.

Agree 100% with this.

 

[Enigma_87]

You disagree that he wasn't a libero in 1966?

I don't think Moore was ever a libero really. He was great on the ball but I don't think he broke forward that often. That's not a criticism by the way, he was just more than anything else an excellent defender.

Those quotes are fine but we may as well just look at the game:



It was an incredible performance and one of the best from a defender in the World Cup. Still though I wouldn't say that he was a libero - it was a fluid team and the whole English line pushed up at times, but Moore looks to me generally to stick to the LCB position in the English back four.

Like I say I think he has the skill set to play as a libero in a back five (so no qualms there) - I just agree with Edgar/OneNil that it may be slightly defensive and an extra midfielder would have worked well. He was never a rampaging defender who would look to break forward into the box.

That's always been my opinion of him at least.

Well as the heat map suggests and him completing north of 60 passes all over the pitch suggest he wasn't a rigid LCB in any sense. He made 2 assists to boot. He was far from the conventional CB as well. He isn't the most expansive libero's or Beckenbauer type of libero(neither I've tasked him to being so), but that doesn't mean he doesn't have the qualities, and also being close enough for that role based on his performances in the world cup.

Of course he was picked for being a brilliant defender and his solidity at the back is number one priority, but that doesn't mean he can't do or feel unnatural to push forward in possession.

The video supports just that btw. He took some shots while combining quick one two. Assisted the Hurst goal, intercepted some balls ahead of the defensive line near the center of the pitch and supported also the midfield.

Besides I disagree with the notion that the the team is slightly defensive. You have 3 players staying back when with the ball and two highly dynamic fullbacks that participate in the two phases.

Being defensive and being solid at the back is a very fine line, so I can expect some concerns in 5-3-2/3-5-2, but both Facchetti and Amoros could be very expansive full backs which balance it out.

I'd be happy to have 3 GOAT defenders in the center against GOAT attackers as a solid defensive base, rather than gung ho approach with 2 expansive full backs in a back 4.

 

[antohan]

In the August edition of France Football 1984 they made a list of the best 10 players of the century in each position and Bengt Gustavsson is rated as number 5.

Spoiler: France Football 1984

Note: I do not think he's top 5 or close to that. But fair to say he's a bloody great stopper.
----------

TBH, that list is complete nonsense. If you actually read the possible candidates stated are old-fashioned centrehalves, centrebacks, liberos... It's a fecking salad and they give absolutely no proper rationale behind the picks. The notion that Parola could be ranked second and Scirea missing out just blows your head wide open. I think I now finally get what @Moby is talking about re: hipsters.

 

[antohan]

Yea it what made him truly special. In 1966 he was more of a goal threat and had more freedom to express himself going forward. Probably next to a DM the 1966 version would stood up more and be more apt, but I need the more mature and defensively excellent Beckenbauer for this one.

I agree, I had him next to Rijkaard in the All-Time draft but you need the 70 one next to Didí.

 

[antohan]

My point was that it's at least odd not to have a very creative player as a 10 in a 3412

Eh?

 

[antohan]

Fun facts! Grenoli never lost a competitive match for Sweden together. It took until the 1958 final for Liedholm and Gren to first lose a competitive international match.

1958-06-29 Sverige - Brasilien 2 - 5 Herrar A VM
1958-06-24 Sverige - Tyskland 3 - 1 Herrar A VM
1958-06-19 Sverige - Sovjet 2 - 0 Herrar A VM
1958-06-12 Sverige - Ungern 2 - 1 Herrar A VM
1958-06-08 Sverige - Mexiko 3 - 0 Herrar A VM
1949-06-02 Sverige - Irland 3 - 1 Herrar A VM-kval
1948-08-13 Sverige - Jugoslavien 3 - 1 Herrar OS
1948-08-10 Sverige - Danmark 4 - 2 Herrar OS
1948-08-05 Sverige - Korea 12 - 0 Herrar OS
1948-08-02 Sverige - Österrike 3 - 0 Herrar OS

it's not particularly amazing mate seeing as they didn't play together all that much.

I feel you man, I remember the old days of foreign based players not getting call ups. I hated that. That's why we actually had a fundraising campaign to buy Morena back from Valencia for a record fee at the time. Imagine the same held for Cristiano and Benfica/Porto fans chipped in to get him back to Sporting so he could play for Portugal... and by the time the funds were raised we had already been knocked out in the 1982 World Cup qualifiers

Almost a decade. What a waste.

 

[antohan]

I actually think this is a good point - it was my first thought when looking at the Enigma's team. The back five does look overly defensive.

I think Enigma should definitely play Moore as he was the best of the bunch but he wasn't a libero in 1966.

Obviously Moore could play in the middle of a back three (as he has the skillset to do so) but I don't think he would ever be overly adventurous in that role (2 goals in 108 games probably attests to that).

I don't buy the arrow but it's not overly defensive IMO (albeit capable of recoiling into a 5 to defend a lead).

It has nothing to do with what Moore can do which Beckenbauer doesn't because Moore is surely there as a covering third man to give Facchetti and Amoros complete freedom.

No?