Agree he fits well but imo it’s in the box to box Tigana role as opposed to the Fernández one. As you correctly said the ‘66 version was a dynamic presence who offered a real threat going forward (his two goals vs Switzerland a good example of his tendency to push forward).
Personally don’t think that role suits the Fernández DM position at all, seems a real risk against Maradona and even stranger when you have Rijkaard on the pitch playing a Tigana role that I don’t think quite suits him either.
Well,it's based on the magic square, not a replica, so there is no need for direct one to one replacements.
In '66 he was not that individualistic as he later in his career and the team was not built around him. He was mostly considered as link between midfield and attack, but when it came to finals he sacrificed his game to counter Charlton. He was a team player foremost.
Would you consider it to be more balanced if he just switched Rijkaard and Beckenbauer?
I see Rijkaard (Fernandez),Beckenbauer (Tigana) and Iniesta (Giresse) all upgrades on their original counterparts. Plus they all have demonstrated ability to play for greater good. Swap or no swap, I see these 4 work as seamlessly as the original, despite slightly different dynamic. The original magic square differentiated itself due to their creativity, cohesiveness and with industrial workrate,,,with ability to move the ball at will. I can see these 4 being able to do the same as well.
@Jim Beam What is Kaizer's role here? In all games except finals, he was a CM more than a DM making lateral runs and opening up the field, whilst in finals he was more dedicated to containing Charlton. Is he having a free role here or tasked with Maradona?
He wasn’t a DM in the final either. His forays and attacking contribution was the reason Alf Ramsey also tasked Sir Bobby(who was also England’s best player at the time) to mark him throughout the game and it resulted in both cancelling each other out in that particular game. Something both accounted for in interviews after the game.
The 66’ version is much more adventurous than a DM or a DLP. He was third in Ballon D’or for his contributions in both phases and not for his defensive solidity demonstrated in the 70s.
Let’s not forget the 66’ version of Kaizer played in a midfield two, not as a DM with 2 more advanced midfield players in Platini and Iniesta.
He wasn’t a DM in the final either. His forays and attacking contribution was the reason Alf Ramsey also tasked Sir Bobby(who was also England’s best player at the time) to mark him throughout the game and it resulted in both cancelling each other out in that particular game. Something both accounted for in interviews after the game.
The 66’ version is much more adventurous than a DM or a DLP. He was third in Ballon D’or for his contributions in both phases and not for his defensive solidity demonstrated in the 70s.
Let’s not forget the 66’ version of Kaizer played in a midfield two, not as a DM with 2 more advanced midfield players in Platini and Iniesta.
Forgot what your point war. It is not a recreation of tactics, but whether Beckenbauer is capable of playing that role or not. I'd say he can without compromising the overall tactics.
Forgot what your point war. It is not a recreation of tactics, but whether Beckenbauer is capable of playing that role or not. I'd say he can without compromising the overall tactics.
It's both. Beckebnauer in 66's is not side midfielder in a diamond or a DM. He played in a free role and ventured forward quite a lot. Here he has too many bodies in front of him.
You have Beckenbauer playing a limited(slightly or whatever you call it) role, you have Scirea playing a limited to his peak (libero) role and potential overlap with Platini when he ventures forward.
In 1966 he was quite further forward compared to playing with Netzer as seen in an example above.
You also have to take in mind this is Beckenbauer months shy of turning 21 and was just having his debut season in the newly formed Bundesliga having played as a left winger in Regionalliga Süd the year before accounting for 17 goals in that season.
I think you are meshing it with the peak or significantly more experienced Beckenbauer gluing those roles together.
Hillsborough, Sheffield, Saturday 23rd July 1966. World Cup Quarter-Final. West Germany 3-0 Uruguay.
West Germany were the favourites against Uruguay. Both teams played in the most popular formation of the day, 4-2-4. Cologne workhorse Wolfgang Overath played beside the man capable of everything from Munich, in the heart of the German team. At 20 years old Beckenbauer is already authoritarian. Teammates respect him. Opponents fear him.
Beckenbauer is no prima donna and fully served the team. He balanced the team when defender Wolfgang Weber pushed forward from the back, reacted when Overath played wide and when left-back Karl-Heinz Schnellinger played narrower. In the last line of defence, he also deputised in the system of two-man marking.
Those fans of a German persuasion were looking at a young, gangly footballer. In aerial duels he was overpowered as the Uruguayans bombarded the German 18-yard box with cross after cross and Beckenbauer looked lost.
It was a completely different ball game when the the ball was on the floor. Beckenbauer’s element. He took the game by the scruff of the neck, initiated passing combinations in midfield, his teammates reacting to one-two passes at high speed. He travelled even faster with the ball at his feet. The Uruguayan defenders with their pure physicality do not have an answer to the threat he posed.
Beckenbauer was always the first to support the striker. Time and again he drifted wide to the wings. In attack he was a whirling dervish, shoving opposing players out of his way with his feet.
Without the ball he gave a sense of calm, considered and elegant. Employing lateral runs to protect those of his teammates running ahead of the ball he destabilised the playing style of the South Americans. He did not engage in one-on-one tackles. He pressurised with his mere presence.
Time after time Beckenbauer and Overath left the middle channel open,pre-occupied with the passes out wide. Uruguay fell into the trap, lured into playing through the midfield and limited to shots from distance. This is Beckenbauer’s take on footballing psychological warfare.
Despite taking an early lead a true battle ensues. The Uruguayans trip, gesticulated and played dirty. Beckenbauer was the first to forge a way through the maze, stepping higher up the pitch, receiving the ball behind the Uruguayan defence, rounding goalkeeper Ladislao Marzurkiewicz with poise.
Did as well they are on yt. He scored 4 goals in that tournament(only Haller and Eusebio scored more) and operated in a much much higher zone than your DM or DLP.
Thought you will go with Beckenbauer instead of Scirea, especially after our game. Regardless of this draft I'd certainly won't agree with you on what you are onto here in terms of Beckenbauer having the perfect balance in that set up and would've commented either way as I've already used Beckenbauer as a midfielder in past drafts
Did as well they are on yt. He scored 4 goals in that tournament(only Haller and Eusebio scored more) and operated in a much much higher zone than your DM or DLP.
you see the stats and you see the highlight reel and he really looks like a b2b but when you watch games you see all those runs are very rarely made and 90% the time he spent in a DM/CM position unlike other B2B players, even defensive ones like Tigana/Davids.
you see the stats and you see the highlight reel and he really looks like a b2b but when you watch games you see all those runs are very rarely made and 90% the time he spent in a DM/CM position unlike other B2B players, even defensive ones like Tigana/Davids.
Rarely? This is all touch compilation against the Soviet Union:
As soon as West Germany won possession he galloped forward. Look how high his positioning was in possession. And yes I've watched the full game, same like you.
Not to derail the thread further I think we have a different understanding of what B2B and DM is in this case so agree to disagree...
Thought you will go with Beckenbauer instead of Scirea, especially after our game. Regardless of this draft I'd certainly won't agree with you on what you are onto here in terms of Beckenbauer having the perfect balance in that set up and would've commented either way as I've already used Beckenbauer as a midfielder in past drafts
You also thought I should go with, here we go: George Best, Il Fenomeno, Cristiano Ronaldo, Edgar Davids and after all that you are talking about unbalanced side because of Beckenbauer as a DLP? And arguing I should have stayed with the same set up you would change like million times before?
I mean... I will just leave it as there is no point anymore.
You also thought I should go with, here we go: George Best, Il Fenomeno, Cristiano Ronaldo, Edgar Davids and after all that you are talking about unbalanced side because of Beckenbauer as a DLP? And arguing I should have stayed with the same set up you would change like million times before?
I mean... I will just leave it as there is no point anymore.
It's both. Beckebnauer in 66's is not side midfielder in a diamond or a DM. He played in a free role and ventured forward quite a lot. Here he has too many bodies in front of him.
You have Beckenbauer playing a limited(slightly or whatever you call it) role, you have Scirea playing a limited to his peak (libero) role and potential overlap with Platini when he ventures forward.
In 1966 he was quite further forward compared to playing with Netzer as seen in an example above.
You also have to take in mind this is Beckenbauer months shy of turning 21 and was just having his debut season in the newly formed Bundesliga having played as a left winger in Regionalliga Süd the year before accounting for 17 goals in that season.
I think you are meshing it with the peak or significantly more experienced Beckenbauer gluing those roles together.
1. Beckenbauer not a side MF in a diamond. I'd say his '66 incarnation is. He played in a free B2B role and surely that's the same expectation here.
2. I'd not call them limited roles. Tactically it's not really odd for a manager to tell players to take a conservative approach. That doesn't mean they suddenly fall off peak or are not to their usual effectiveness. They'll still deliver a top notch performance. Both Beckenbauer and Charlton were in a 'limited' role in the final. Doesn't take the shine off either of them in any way.
3. Young Beckenbauer - does it really matter? The performance attest to his capabilities. First time Beckenbauer's age has been held against him, esp in 1966!
Well,it's based on the magic square, not a replica, so there is no need for direct one to one replacements.
In '66 he was not that individualistic as he later in his career and the team was not built around him. He was mostly considered as link between midfield and attack, but when it came to finals he sacrificed his game to counter Charlton. He was a team player foremost.
Would you consider it to be more balanced if he just switched Rijkaard and Beckenbauer?
I see Rijkaard (Fernandez),Beckenbauer (Tigana) and Iniesta (Giresse) all upgrades on their original counterparts. Plus they all have demonstrated ability to play for greater good. Swap or no swap, I see these 4 work as seamlessly as the original, despite slightly different dynamic. The original magic square differentiated itself due to their creativity, cohesiveness and with industrial workrate,,,with ability to move the ball at will. I can see these 4 being able to do the same as well.
1. Beckenbauer not a side MF in a diamond. I'd say his '66 incarnation is. He played in a free B2B role and surely that's the same expectation here.
2. I'd not call them limited roles. Tactically it's not really odd for a manager to tell players to take a conservative approach. That doesn't mean they suddenly fall off peak or are not to their usual effectiveness. They'll still deliver a top notch performance. Both Beckenbauer and Charlton were in a 'limited' role in the final. Doesn't take the shine off either of them in any way.
3. Young Beckenbauer - does it really matter? The performance attest to his capabilities. First time Beckenbauer's age has been held against him, esp in 1966!
Not what I'm getting from the thread or at least he's not in a free B2B here. I see him being suggested as a side midfielder, DM, DLP but not the role depicted and what you just called him here. Still I'd have reservations accepting him in a such with another two central figures in front of him in Iniesta and Platini. He would obviously be awesome in that incarnation without Iniesta / Platini in front of him. He would need space to dominate.
2. In limited role I mean his attacking contribution obviously going to struggle when you have guys like Pele and Maradona on the other side, unless you consider him superhuman and being at 2 places at once. He left a lot of ground behind in 1966.
on point 3. Yes and that is one of my points. At that age he played in a particular way - he was much more explosive going forward and he played in a free role. If we use particular version of a player in drafts shouldn't we account to his actual game at the time? Because he was anything but a conservative DLP or a DM at the time. At least from what I've seen. The age was in relation to working with Netzer, as they made that partnership later in his career.
@Jim Beam What is Kaizer's role here? In all games except finals, he was a CM more than a DM making lateral runs and opening up the field, whilst in finals he was more dedicated to containing Charlton. Is he having a free role here or tasked with Maradona?
He is a DLP and if you see the games in 1966 he was often positioned that way. I can't give a restricted role to Beckenbauer really as it is not in his nature. Of course he will use both his fantastic passing and if the space opens up (and again there is no any sign of press or limiting him in that sense which is crazy imo) he will go forward making chaos linking with Platini and other forwards.
As I said, Rijkaard is a perfect foil in that sense to cover for him if necessery.
In the defensive zone, both him and Rijkaard drop in the middle making that defence even harder to break. Both will be tasked to cover the zone where Maradona operates as I think man marking Diego is suicidal.
As for Fernandez, when they are really stuck on him, this is not an exact replica, but this is much improved version of him in that position and in every sense. To repeat that article...
Luis Fernandez brought a combative element to the team as well as rejuvenating a side lacking in youth. He added greater balance to the square that had looked lopsided beforehand. He bossed each game with sophisticated charm. He added steel to the back four and was also the link between the defence and the attack. His industry and bite made him a prototype, a model midfielder and a vital midfield general. He was crucial in freeing up space for the Giresse and Platini to move forward and work the space. Despite his ruggedness he was more than just a midfield destroyer, he possessed a delightful touch, accuracy and a panoramic vision in reading the game. He was the final piece of puzzle to the Magic Square.
But, no, since he is even more superior in controlling the game, even more superior in attack and defence I should put him aside. Wtf? Can he play this role on a highest level? The answer is obvious.
This is also one of trademarks Fernandez runs while we at it...
It is not just Diego in question, any great player can be replaced here. In the context of a modern game and modern time, football simply evolved and moved from the man marking system.
It is not just Diego in question, any great player can replaced here. In the context of a modern game and modern time, football simply evolved and moved from the man marking system.
The DM version of Beckenbauer came 3rd in Balon d'Or only after Sir Bobby Charlton and Eusebio. One of the most influential players in the WC too and definitely would have a better impact than Tigana.
I'm not comparing them as Beckenbauer is head & shoulders ahead of Tigana, but this particular argument is a bit weird since Tigana came second only to Platini in 1984 Ballon d'Or vote in this particular role.
I think talk of tactics has been done, so time to showcase the attackers in my team, whilst there are fine margins in other areas imo my attack is a tier above.
Starting with Maradona, everyone always talks about his unbelievable technical ability, but not often the other aspects such as his mentality, he was a tough little b*stard.
Here's a really good article aout him, pulled out some of the best quotes:
Diego Maradona stands alone in football’s glorious outlaw age
That feat naturally dominates Touched By God, and yet the striking part of the book is not so much the old glories and grudges, but its startlingly vivid textural contrast. The extreme physicality of Maradona’s era, the sense that football back then was an outlaw world and a place of wild human possibilities, not to mention a genuinely violent sport – most obviously on the pitch.
Maradona still holds the record for most fouls suffered in a World Cup (Mexico 86) and most fouls in a single World Cup game (23 against Italy at Spain 82). And let’s be clear. We’re not talking dainty little tactical tumbles. These were often staged assaults.
Against South Korea in Mexico City, Maradona is punched in the face and left “screaming in pain” after “one of them spiked me so hard it went through my sock and my bandages”. Playing Peru, he is marked so brutally by Luis Reyna that as Maradona leaves the pitch to have his wounds tended, Reyna goes over to the touchline and just waits there for him to come out again, ignoring the rest of the game going on behind him.
Later, Maradona puts off having surgery on his injured knee, which swells up and “bursts” during a game. As he writhes in agony, team doctor ‘El Loco’ Oliviera marches on to the pitch with an enormous syringe and injects its mysterious liquid directly into his knee. Numbed, Maradona plays on. He is at this time the most expensive footballer in the world. It is this air of slightly wild, unstyled amateurishness that shines through Diego’s reminiscences.
At Mexico 86, Argentina’s players wash and shave outside in the fresh air, living in what was basically a jerry-built campsite. After his ankle is snapped by an infamous Andoni Goikoetxea lunge in 1983 (“it sounded just like a piece of wood splitting”), Maradona is carried off on a blanket and driven to hospital in a small borrowed van. Before one qualifier he’s kicked in the knee by a random passer-by as he gets off the team bus, and stays up until 5am before the game trying to ice it in his bedroom. Imagine if this happened to Messi now. Someone would be shot. North Korea would launch a missile at the moon. The internet would break.
Back to reality: even as Maradona scored his unforgettable second goal he got a kick from Terry Butcher that left his ankle swollen to twice its size after the game.This is still the lasting imprint of Touched By God, the feeling of something entirely other. Not to mention another example of the basic pointlessness of comparisons, of that endless, formalised quest for an all-time champion, for one of these giants to be named definitively as the greatest.
There is no real point of comparison here. Maradona’s world is all pain and ragged edges, a game of blood and courage that feels utterly removed from the sealed edges, endless scrutiny and managed spaces of modern football.
It is simply another sport, another life entirely. Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo are at least present in the same timeline, pressed against the same surfaces, subject to the same pressures, a consumer choice between competing forms of greatness. Maradona, meanwhile, stands alone, giant of a lost world that was neither better nor worse. But which remains – even peering back down that grainy, fond lens – gloriously ragged and gloriously undimmed.
I think talk of tactics has been done, so time to showcase the attackers in my team, whilst there are fine margins in other areas imo my attack is a tier above.
You didn't answer at all how you will deal with Beckenbauer or Platini (I did answer the part with Maradona and defending centrally against your attack).
As I said in OP, I wanted you to go narrow and in a diamond. 2 main reasons among others:
Diamond is a bit weak and leaves space on either side of the 6 and even 10 because of it's shape. My team will attack both areas with it's best players.
The space around number 6 (Zito) on either side can be exploited by great number 10 (Platini) who will recieve the ball not in the centre, but in a half-space or in the most dangerous area for a creative player to have the ball. To make things worse for you on the other side of the spectrum is Iniesta too.
Finally, space around your number 10 is weakness in a defensive sense too, as it is easy to break if you have a right type of a deep midfielder who can penetrate the lines relatively well and create an overload. Doing this with Beckenbauer off all people.
Bottom line: one of the main reasons for playing Beckenbauer in these specific position is also your actual set-up. And it fully plays to my star players strength. Since we're banging about balance and shoehorning which is baffling to me.
And as I said, for a diamond your left side isn't nearly as optimal as it should be.
I think talk of tactics has been done, so time to showcase the attackers in my team, whilst there are fine margins in other areas imo my attack is a tier above.
You didn't answer at all how you will deal with Beckenbauer or Platini (I did answer the part with Maradona and defending centrally against your attack).
As I said in OP, I wanted you to go narrow and in a diamond. 2 main reasons among others:
Diamond is a bit weak and leaves space on either side of the 6 and even 10 because of it's shape. My team will attack both areas with it's best players.
The space around number 6 (Zito) on either side can be exploited by great number 10 (Platini) who will recieve the ball not in the centre, but in a half-space or in the most dangerous area for a creative player to have the ball. To make things worse for you on the other side of the spectrum is Iniesta too.
Finally, space around your number 10 is weakness in a defensive sense too, as it is easy to break if you have a right type of a deep midfielder who can penetrate the lines relatively well and create an overload. Doing this with Beckenbauer off all people.
Bottom line: one of the main reasons for playing Beckenbauer in these specific position is also your actual set-up. And it fully plays to my star players strength. Since we're banging about balance and shoehorning which is baffling to me.
And as I said, for a diamond your left side isn't nearly as optimal as it should be.
To be honest I don't mind Beckenbauer pushing forward as it will leave Rijkaard exposed vs Maradona and Pelé, that's why I don't think he's the right player for this system, you want some more constrained to sit back. This also leads into my other point about having 3 players who like to drop deep and pick up the ball, it won't be efficient or effective.
I think you are really under rating Falcao and Neeskens defensive game, esp Neeskens who actually played as a right back in certain times of his career and Falcao was pretty tenacious too, imo both are defensively superb. Your analysis completely igonered these two, which answers your queries. Then you also have Diego, whilst not a defensive powerhouse he would put work in to help out when required- alot more than Platini and Iniesta who will be non factors in terms of defence.
Like yourself with Diego, it's pointless trying to man mark Platini, as he was great at ghosting around and often dropped deep - and really deep (again I bring up the conflict with Kaiser, Scirea here).
As for the left side this has already been discussed and I put forward evidence of Nilton's attacking game, no point repeating it. And also he's not dissimilar to Alberto on your side either. Something that hasn't been mentioned is both Pele and Ronaldo are able to work the channels when required, supported by the full backs there is plenty of width. And I also don't think Kaiser is suited as the side midfielder filling in for the full back, which I'd expect both Pelé and Ronaldo to expose.
Iniesta who played for pretty much world best pressing team will be non factor in defence? That's quite a statement. With Blokhin and Kalle upfront?
You also don't mind Beckenbauer pushing forward and I am the one underrating your players. Btw. there will be Rijkaard, Scirea, Desailly behind him. Not a bad company.
And there is really nothing again in terms how will you break my defence except you hoping I will lose the ball while going forward.
Iniesta who played for pretty much world best pressing team will be non factor in defence? That's quite a statement. With Blokhin and Kalle upfront?
You also don't mind Beckenbauer pushing forward and I am the one underrating your players. Btw. there will be Rijkaard, Scirea, Desailly behind him. Not a bad company.
And there is really nothing again in terms how will you break my defence except you hoping I will lose the ball while going forward.
Barca iniesta was based on an eniterly different system of collective press, are you doing that here? As an individual he doesn't have the same defensive ability or physicality of Neeskens or Falcao.
Not at all, the game is about exposing and finding space, I've already pointed out how Desailly and a Scirea and the best fits for these types of strikers.
It's not about hoping you lose the ball, Zito, Falcao, Maradona, Pele were all excellent users of the ball. I think you are under rating their ability to keep the ball and move it around. Not to mention my back line who are also all comfortable on it.
Barca iniesta was based on an eniterly different system of collective press, are you doing that here? As an individual he doesn't have the same defensive ability or physicality of Neeskens or Falcao.
Not at all, the game is about exposing and finding space, I've already pointed out how Desailly and a Scirea and the best fits for these types of strikers.
Johan Neeskens – “The second greatest player in the world”
British football fans of a certain age, when asked to sum up the epitome of the ultimate representative of their national football values, would probably go for Bryan Robson with his all-action style, never-say-die attitude, uncanny knack of scoring important goals and seemingly indefatigable ability to drink 12 pints the night before an important game and still be man of the match. As a United fan, I am naturally biased but Robbo really was an inspiration, carrying the team on his (injury-ravaged) shoulders through many lean years and would surely be a pick in any best-ever United selection.
Yes, he was a great…
But to give those who never saw him play an idea of just how good Johan Neeskens was, I would say he was twice the player. One of the all-time greats, establishing a template for the modern midfielder.Fit, skilled, superb tackler, an eye for a pass, a dead ball specialist and not afraid to stick his foot in when it was needed (evidence for the prosecution – final second stage match against Brazil in Dortmund, 1974 – they started a row, he finished it).
Neeskens signed for Ajax in 1970 from his local side RCH Heemstede and was initially to make his mark at right-back, playing in that position in the first of Ajax’s three consecutive European Cup wins in 1971, aged 19, against Panathinaikos. On that day, the Ajax back four was Neeskens, Vasovic, Hulshoff and Suurbier… not bad at all! Equally gifted at baseball and basketball (and a keen goalkeeper in training) it was football where his talent was best suited.
The three wins in Europe plus the rise of the Dutch national side in the early 1970s brought these talents to a larger audience and it was no surprise when Barcelona enticed Neeskens to join Johan Cruyff in 1974. Earning the nickname among local fans of Johan Segon (“Johan the Second”), he was continually asked about what it was like, continually being in the shadow of Cruyff. “I don’t mind being the second greatest player in the world” was his amusing if hardly modest answer.
His time with the Catalan giants was not conspicuous by winning trophies – one domestic and one cup-winners cup being the total of his medals haul – but he did himself no favours during an incident which only came to light a few years ago. In 1978, Barça president, the all-powerful José Luis Núñez, was in the gents toilet when he noticed that there was no toilet paper left. He asked Neeskens, who was minding his own business in the stall next door, to pass him a roll. Out of mischief or maybe spite, he didn’t and Johan was on his way the next year. Oh well, it beats “tactical differences” or “training ground bust-up”.
It was around this time that the Americans were throwing money at “soccer”. Johan followed the money trail and got himself a lucrative contract with New York Cosmos which saw him spend five years there. Returning to Holland for a spell with Groningen, this was pretty much the end as far as a playing career was concerned but coaching beckoned, eventually.
Internationally, Neeskens was indeed a superstar. Two excellent world cup campaigns in 1974 (Germany) and 1978 (Argentina) saw him as a vital cog in what many would say (I certainly would) was the greatest team to never win the ultimate football trophy. The cool head required, to calmly put away Holland’s first-minute penalty against hosts Germany in that tournament’s final was typical of his big-game temperament, as were his performances four years later in far more hostile circumstances as Argentina’s rabid home support and fascist government did everything in their power to ensure their team were crowned champions. The fact that the Peru side had been bribed to lose their game against the hosts, which meant that Argentina qualified for the final at the expense of arch local rivals Brazil (who were a terrible side, devoid of any notion of the beautiful game, echoes of 1974), surely pointed to the fact that nothing would prevent a, tainted, win.
Neeskens and his teammates gave their all and took the match to extra time but to no avail, as amid hysterical scenes, Argentina scored two goals in added time. In between these tournaments, Holland qualified for the final stage of the 1976 European championships. Still with Cruyff and Willem van Hanegem in the squad, the Dutch were heavily fancied but the boorish Welsh referee Clive Thomas had other ideas and sent off Van Hanegem and Neeskens in the semi-final against Czechoslovakia. The Dutch lost 3-1 but got their act together for the (meaningless) third-place play off against hosts Yugoslavia to win 3-2.
After retirement, a coaching career seemed the obvious route. Small roles with small teams were the order of the day (taking in Euro lightweights such as Zug, Stafa and Singen – no, me neither), but a significant step up was taken when Neeskens became one of the coaching assistants to Guus Hiddink in the mid-nineties with the Dutch national team, staying on after his boss quit to be replaced by Frank Rijkaard for Euro 2000. Thereafter it was back to domestic matters, with a four year spell at NEC followed by rather undistinguished placements in Europe and Australia.
In March 2004, Pele, in association with FIFA, produced a list of the 100 Greatest Living Players, to celebrate 100 years of that organisation. Any lists of this nature are purely subjective and can rarely be described as definitive, but it was interesting to note that eight of those listed were former Ajax men. Alongside Johan Neeskens, there was Marco Van Basten, Dennis Bergkamp, Johan Cruyff, Edgar Davids, Patrick Kluivert, Frank Rijkaard and Clarence Seedorf. Nice to see that our wonderful club contributed almost a tenth of those selected. Then again, David Beckham was in the list so who can say how accurate it is?
I once saw a photograph (in a book from 1974 that I still have) of Johan Neeskens, blasting the ball, his face set in the kind of rictus grimace, beloved of box-to-box midfielders. The caption read “the fulminating shot of Johan Neeskens”. I didn’t know what “fulminating” meant but it sounded pretty bloody awesome. Like he was.
