Billy No Mates Draft QF: Invictus/Theon vs harms

What will the result be?


  • Total voters
    21
  • Poll closed .
I don't get why you are so bitter about Desailly. His direct rival here is Sammer, who, by your own admission, is multi-tasking. Desailly, imo, is a better defender than Sammer and I don't see why he can't deal with Platini first and then help out his teammates if Messi, for example, will drop into his zone.

Sammer deserved Ballon D'Or not because of his defending first approach. He deserved it because, being a defender, he was able to hurt the opposition by his rampaging runs, which he doesn't do in this game by your own words. So you have a defender who was known firstly because of his attacking contribution, tells everybody that he is multitasking in defence and then judge me for doing the same with Desailly.

Here's the example of what Desailly was capable in his peak. Definitely not in the same league as a Sammer attacking wise but an absolute beast defensive wise, a GOAT in his limited role

I'm not bitter about Desailly - I'm just making the point that you're going way over the top with your descriptions of him. He's facing the best midfielder to ever come from Europe - A three time Ballon d'Or winner who rattled 82 goals in 139 games against the best Europe and Italy had to offer, and is rated among the greatest ever, irrespective of positions - as well as one of the finest passers of the ball ever - someone who dissected Serie A defenses on a regular basis.

It's an absolutely mammoth task and beyond any single player - including Desailly. The fact he has an imperious Lionel Messi floating around him only compounds the problem. And we haven't even mentioned Van Basten and Gento. Not too sure what your point is on Sammer and I don't think there is anything between them defensively (Sammer is however clearly better overall). We stated in the OP that Sammer is multitasking because - he was an exceptional overall footballer and stretching him to his limits is us getting out the best out of his ability.

By multi-tasking we're asking Sammer to use his remarkable qualities as a libero - to read the game, judge the situation and act accordingly. This is Matthias Sammer we're talking about - he knows what needs to be done in each situation, which is why we aren't limiting him by stripping down his qualities in reductive defensive terms.
 
Last edited:
I hope that this cameo will start a new chapter for Streltsov's fantasy career

Last week, Valentin Ivanov was finally given the gold medal he missed out on at the 1956 Olympics. The Soviet forward had been a key member of the side but was injured in the semi-final against Bulgaria, missed the final and fell foul of the policy of the time that dictated only those who played in the gold-medal match received medals. Inevitably, thoughts also drifted to the other great forward who missed out on the final: Eduard Streltsov. His gold medal will never be awarded.

Streltsov had been magnificent in the semi-final. The right-back Nikolay Tyschenko had broken a collarbone and, with Ivanov also struggling, the USSR were effectively down to nine men when Bulgaria took the lead early in extra-time. Streltsov, though, dragged his side forward, scored the equaliser after 112 minutes and then set up an improbable winner four minutes later.

The Soviet coach, Gavriil Kachalin wanted a front pair who played together at club level, so with Ivanov out of the final, he dropped Streltsov as well. He was replaced by Nikita Simonyan, who offered him his medal after the final. Streltsov refused. "He said to me, 'Nikita, I will win many other trophies,'" recalled Simonyan. He was wrong.

His confidence was understandable. Even at 18, Streltsov was a tall, powerful forward, possessed of a fine first touch and extraordinary footballing intelligence. A year earlier, he had come seventh in the voting for European Player of the Year. Charismatic and good-looking to boot, it seemed that he had the world at his feet.

And then, on May 25 1958, he left the USSR's pre-World Cup training camp at Tarasovka, just outside Moscow, and went to a party at a dacha belonging to Eduard Karakhanov, a military officer recently returned from a posting in the far east. The following morning he was arrested and charged with the rape of Marina Lebedeva, a young woman he'd met at the party.

He confessed, apparently after being told that, by doing so, he'd be allowed to play in the World Cup. He was promptly sentenced to 12 years in the gulag, and was quietly airbrushed from history. Released after seven years, remarkably, he returned to his club, Torpedo - always the smallest of the five Moscow sides - and in his first season back led them to the league title. In 1967 and 1968 he was named Soviet Player of the Year. Whatever happened at Tarasovka that night, his is an astonishing story. The question that won't go away is: was he guilty?

Russian football - and western journalists looking for an easy story - would love to believe Streltsov was framed, and it is not difficult to understand why. He remains the greatest outfield player Russia has ever produced and it is not inconceivable that, given the opportunity to play, he would have outshone even the 17-year-old Pele at the 1958 Word Cup. It would be easier to revere him, though, if he were not a convicted rapist. That is why there is a need to exonerate him, but it is also easy to understand why Russian football is so drawn to a talent who withstood state oppression and emerged triumphant - how it would love that to be an allegory for its own travails.

The obvious question to ask is why anyone would have framed Streltsov. There is a theory that he was targeted for refusing to leave Torpedo, which was based on the ZIL motor factory, to join Dinamo, the team of the KGB, but the more plausible reason has its roots in his womanising. There seems to have been a general concern that Streltsov was becoming rather too much of a celebrity, but the specific problem was his supposed relationship with the daughter of Yekaterina Furtseva, the only woman ever to become a member of the Politburo.

Svetlana Furtseva was 16, and apparently besotted with Streltsov. Her mother, a favourite of Nikita Khrushchev, met the forward early in 1957 at a reception at the Kremlin to celebrate the Olympic victory. She mentioned his likely marriage to her daughter, to which he replied: "I already have a fiancée and I will not marry her." As if that wasn't humiliating enough, he was later heard to say to a friend (depending which account you believe) either "I would never marry that monkey" or "I would rather be hanged than marry such a girl." If the conspiracy theorists are to be believed, it was at that moment his card was marked.

Certainly the reaction to his sending-off in Odessa that April appears excessive. The headline in Sovetsky Sport read: "This is not a hero", and several letters were printed, supposedly from members of the proletariat, condemning Streltsov as an example of the evils of western imperialism.

The Department of Soviet Football seems never to have warmed to Streltsov. An internal memo even criticised the timing of his wedding. "We found out before the important friendly against Romania that he had married," it read. "This shows how weak the educational work at Torpedo is." Communist Party archives apparently reveal a degree of distrust in the player, and Streltsov, having attracted the interest of clubs in France and Sweden following tours with Torpedo, was marked down as a possible defector. His file reads: "According to a verified source, Streltsov said to his friends in 1957 that he was always sorry to return to the USSR after trips abroad."

And then there is the matter of why Karakhanov asked Streltsov to his dacha. While it is certainly possible that he just liked the idea of having a famous footballer at his party, there are those who see something more sinister in his invitation. It is suspiciously convenient, they say, that he had returned to Russia only a few days earlier.

But all that is circumstantial. More concrete evidence of a plot comes from an interview his international coach gave shortly before his death. "When I tried to help Streltsov, I was told by police that Khrushchev himself had been informed about the case," Kachalin told the football historian, Axel Vartanyan. "I then dashed to a regional Communist Party committee headquarters and asked the first secretary to suspend the case until the end of the World Cup. I was told that nothing could be done and they pointed meaningfully upwards. I understood then that it was the end. I heard that Furtseva had it in for Streltsov, but who knows exactly what happened?"

The only certainty is that something did. "They went to the dacha," Ivanov said. "It's a dark story. Who raped whom, it's hard to say. I think if a girl goes to the suburbs for a night ... then a guy is waiting for her, as it were ... and she is the same... but I don't believe it was a set-up, no. Maybe it was the host of the dacha. I don't know who raped her, but she said it was Streltsov. So it's a dark story." Perhaps significantly, none of the players to whom I spoke were prepared, even now, to categorically defend their former team-mate. "I don't remember, but I did hear that he had refused to marry Furtseva's daughter," said Viktor Shustikov.

Most odd, though, was Simonyan's reaction. "What happened with Streltsov you cannot explain," he said. "It is a mysterious thing. He wrote to his mother saying he was taking the blame for someone else. It was the system that punished Streltsov. I don't know for sure if there was a rape on the part of Streltsov, but he and the girl slept together." He shrugged. "He was young, a bachelor, unmarried ..."

Actually, Streltsov had married just under a year before. Perhaps that is an indication that he didn't take his vows particularly seriously, or perhaps Simonyan's memory is just faulty. As he broke off, Simonyan reached into a drawer in his desk and took out a book. He opened it and removed a photograph and handed it to me without a word.

The print showed four images. Two were of a dark-haired young woman - Lebedeva. In one, she was lying back on what seemed to be a hospital bed, apparently asleep, her eyes ringed with bruises. The other two were of Streltsov. In the more striking, his face, captured in profile, was streaked from nose to cheekbone with three parallel scratches. Of course there is the possibility that the photographs were doctored or the injuries inflicted at a later date, but Soviet justice rarely required such damning evidence.

Streltsov died from throat cancer in 1990, and with him went any chance of establishing the truth. Lebedeva has vanished, although there was a sighting of her at Streltsov's grave in 1997, laying flowers the day after the annual ceremony on the anniversary of his death. Perhaps he was the glorious martyr that Russian football demands, but the case is far less clear-cut than some would have us believe.

 
Well for a start I would say that Messi is at worst the joint-best player on the pitch. People can argue on an exact ranking but I think it's clear at this stage that Messi, Maradona and Pele are in a league of their own - And Messi quite clearly was not a 'worse' footballer than Pele.

In reality of you started a thread now on the Caf to ask who the greatest player ever is between the three, I would wager the results would be something like Pele 20%, Maradona 40% Messi 40% - Might be quite an interesting thread actually.

I'm all up for it.

I'd add Di Stefano, Cruyff and Beckenbauer to the mix tor a top 6. I think that would be the top tier.

As for for who is best I'm inclined to put Messi to the bottom of that tier. Sure he won several Ballon D'or but nowadays the top teams are far ahead of anyone else. Back in the days we had the European cup where only champions could participate and if you look most of the top clubs there were restrictions for foreigners you can't possibly compile a team like Barca had just few years ago and now with Suarez, Messi, Iniesta, Neymar, etc...

I mean just look at the team we faced in 2009 - Messi, Eto'o, Iniesta, Xavi, Henry, Busquets, Yaya... Sure Messi is a main man in that team but all the others mentioned have a decent shout to be the best in their particular positions.

Fittingly enough(I know it's a beat up argument) but Messi haven't really won anything on international level, compared to Pele's 3 world cup victories. Sure he's one of the best in history no denying that but he also benefited a lot from Barca having a great generation and some world class additions to their team and also no Franco influence in the same time like he did have for Real before.

Take Maradona's 1986 side in the WC and it was clear that he was the main man to lift the level of the team and win it not unfair to say on his own. I haven't seen Messi so far lead his national team even to Copa victory.

Of course all is down to preference and probably you might be right for the poll as most people would've never watched all bar Messi and probably Maradona.
 
I'm all up for it.

I'd add Di Stefano, Cruyff and Beckenbauer to the mix tor a top 6. I think that would be the top tier.

As for for who is best I'm inclined to put Messi to the bottom of that tier. Sure he won several Ballon D'or but nowadays the top teams are far ahead of anyone else. Back in the days we had the European cup where only champions could participate and if you look most of the top clubs there were restrictions for foreigners you can't possibly compile a team like Barca had just few years ago and now with Suarez, Messi, Iniesta, Neymar, etc...

The top tier IMO would just be Messi, Maradona and Pele - I think it gets too hard when you add more players.

I wouldn't put Platini in a lower tier than Cruyff or Beckenbauer for instance - In my opinon he is most definitely in that bracket. Same with Ronaldo.

For Messi, Pele and Maradona.. I genuinely couldn't split them. I think I would probably go for one of the Argentinians though, if push came to shove.
 
The top tier IMO would just be Messi, Maradona and Pele - I think it gets too hard when you add more players.

I wouldn't put Platini in a lower tier than Cruyff or Beckenbauer for instance - In my opinon he is most definitely in that bracket. Same with Ronaldo.

For Messi, Pele and Maradona.. I genuinely couldn't split them. I think I would probably go for one of the Argentinians though, if push came to shove.

I'd probably go with Maradona as personal preference, then Cruyff/Pele then Di Stefano then Beckenbauer/Messi (and pretty much picked them in that order in the draft as well), but I guess we'll have a lot of variants there if we do a poll.

Platini I'd put him below that tier in the tier where MvB are, Brazillian Ronaldo, Eusebio, Best, Puskas.

The first six really had something special that brought to the game and that they bring to the table.

I wonder where C.Ronaldo will stack up when his career is done maybe he'll fit in that second tier given individual accolades. But yeah I think a thread would be worthy if not created or discussed already in the light of 2nd all time draft in a row.

As for the game I liked a lot harms in midfield and Rummenige and Pele up front but I think I'd go with you guys after reinforcing that right side.
 
I give a slight advantage to harms midfield.

Yeah, I'm just not sure at all how you've come to that conclusion.

Both midfields were fairly similar with an attacking midfielder/deeper playmaker/defensive midfielder - so Netzer/Falcao/Desailly and Platini/Redondo/Sammer.

For me personally there isn't one of those midfielders who I would swap for their counterparts. Platini is the single best midfielder to ever come out of Europe and by a distance a better player than Netzer. Redondo and Falcao is the most evenly matched pairing, but personally I would give the edge to Redondo who IMO was better defensively whilst still being fantastic in possession - nothing to split here though. Then finally in defensive midfield, there is no way that I would take Desailly for Matthias Sammer - the latter is just the better all round footballer and has a much bigger influence on the team than Desailly does.

I think this whole libero point has been over-played to the extreme. There really isnt much difference starting next to two centre backs and pushing up, or starting 10 yards ahead of the centre backs with a license to drop back. As was highlighted in the game with Beckenbauer, defensive midfield is generally where a libero would play now that 3-5-2's aren't in regular use, you see defensive midfielders all the time dropping deep to cover for advancing fullbacks or picking up possession from the back line to initiate attacks.

Sammer is absolutely vital to how this team is set up and he probably has the most important role on the pitch given the amount of creativity harms has in central areas. In the whole draft it's only Rijkaard and Beckenbauer that I would consider swapping him for, but even then Beckenbauer would be a slightly different role.
 
Yeah, I'm just not sure at all how you've come to that conclusion.

Both midfields were fairly similar with an attacking midfielder/deeper playmaker/defensive midfielder - so Netzer/Falcao/Desailly and Platini/Redondo/Sammer.

For me personally there isn't one of those midfielders who I would swap for their counterparts. Platini is the single best midfielder to ever come out of Europe and by a distance a better player than Netzer. Redondo and Falcao is the most evenly matched pairing, but personally I would give the edge to Redondo who IMO was better defensively whilst still being fantastic in possession - nothing to split here though. Then finally in defensive midfield, there is no way that I would take Desailly for Matthias Sammer - the latter is just the better all round footballer and has a much bigger influence on the team than Desailly does.

I think this whole libero point has been over-played to the extreme. There really isnt much difference starting next to two centre backs and pushing up, or starting 10 yards ahead of the centre backs with a license to drop back. As was highlighted in the game with Beckenbauer, defensive midfield is generally where a libero would play now that 3-5-2's aren't in regular use, you see defensive midfielders all the time dropping deep to cover for advancing fullbacks or picking up possession from the back line to initiate attacks.

Sammer is absolutely vital to how this team is set up and he probably has the most important role on the pitch given the amount of creativity harms has in central areas. In the whole draft it's only Rijkaard and Beckenbauer that I would consider swapping him for, but even then Beckenbauer would be a slightly different role.


Purely at DM role I'd go with Desailly instead of Sammer to be fair. Otherwise I'd pick Redondo and Platini, depending on how to set up the team of course.

I agree with the libero/sweeper matter tho. You play behind and in front of a line of four players at the end, does it really matter if you are 10-15 yards in a different zone? The DM and sweeper are quite in common of what is expected from both positions, even starting up the attack, you wold probably receive the ball in the same zone.

All in all I'd pick Desailly to play a destroyer/anchor role because for me he's better defensively than Sammer. If you are to play a more box to box role with each of Redondo/Sammer covering each other when one goes up the field then yeah Sammer makes more sense.
 
Both sides CB pairings seem a bit off terms of compatibility.
 
Both sides CB pairings seem a bit off terms of compatibility.
To be honest, I don't really think they're that incompatible. Ferdinand-Moore can work well. Both aren't that passive as central defenders; they both know when to step and get at an attacker's feet, and both know when to step back and cover for the other players. It's not as if both are strictly passive.

With Stam-Cannavaro, that's equally as compatible. Stam's more of a hard-man, aggressive stopper, but he has a good partner in Cannavaro, whose intelligence and astute positioning can make up for Stam's bite and aggression.

Finally, I love that @harms finally brought out Streltsov. I really, really like him, and I think both of the Pelé's can be dangerous against the opposition. Having said that, though, Sammer's one mean midfielder who's a tireless runner as well as a genius of a player. There's a reason he was known as Beckenbauer's successor when he became a libero. Whilst I really love Kalle and Rensenbrink with the central pair of Pelé's, I still think that Invictus' team is just more solid, overall. Redondo-Sammer with that backline is absolutely :drool:. I really see no weaknesses there. With harms' defence, though, Lahm is a real weak point. He struggles against quick, speedy players, and Gento is certainly that. I struggle to see how Lahm can remotely contain him. That one weak point is a big concern for harms in a match where the small weaknesses are the ones that can kill you.
 
@Invictus voted for me, I take it he conceded? :D
Didn't have a fair chance against the modern side with multiple Ballon D'Or winners while Pele and Falcao weren't eligible and Netzer with Rensenbrink were only runners-up (history is cruel)
Good game.
 
Well played @harms, bit unfortunate only 1 squad could go through. :(

Finally make it past the QFs on the 3rd attempt. :mad:
 
Finally make it past the QFs on the 3rd attempt. :mad:
You certainly deserved it sooner, you're a great addition to the drafts

I blame the reinforcements. Joga pulled out "the harms", quite literally, when I picked Facchetti and moved Krol to the centre. And Physio refused to lose in the last round. Imagine Best - Pele - Rummennigge front line :drool:
 
Purely at DM role I'd go with Desailly instead of Sammer to be fair. Otherwise I'd pick Redondo and Platini, depending on how to set up the team of course.

I agree with the libero/sweeper matter tho. You play behind and in front of a line of four players at the end, does it really matter if you are 10-15 yards in a different zone? The DM and sweeper are quite in common of what is expected from both positions, even starting up the attack, you wold probably receive the ball in the same zone.

All in all I'd pick Desailly to play a destroyer/anchor role because for me he's better defensively than Sammer. If you are to play a more box to box role with each of Redondo/Sammer covering each other when one goes up the field then yeah Sammer makes more sense.

I can see what you're saying and I agree with harms' point that Desailly is at that GOAT level when you're after a pure destroyer.

The thing is that I couldn't really imagine a situation in which I wanted the slightly better destroyer over the more complete player in Sammer. They were both excellent defensively and I whilst I would give the edge to Desailly I don't think the difference was so significant as to outweigh all the other things that Sammer brings to the side.

Desailly was clearly more physically imposing in terms of his strength and height, but then physically Sammer was quicker and could run all day. Defensively I don't think there was much between them - the younger, midfield version of Desailly certainly didn't read the game better than Sammer. I can probably buy that he was a better tackler/pure ball winner, but in terms of defensive positioning and reading the play I wouldn't accept that he was better than Sammer. And then you have the passing, technical and leadership qualities where Sammer was clearly on another level.

That's just my opinion though and I appreciate that others may view it differently. As I said above it's only really Rijkaard or Beckenbauer that I would prefer in that role, particularly the former as I think Beckenbauer would play the position slightly differently.
 
It's not an obvious and disturbing clash, no. There's a point in there somewhere, though. Platini is similar to Maradona for me in this sense: He needs to control the operation, run the shop, be the main man. While Messi doesn't have to be the main playmaker, and doesn't need to hog the ball all the time, he nevertheless thrives on being the true focal point of the team. And that's what Platini does too. That's where the potential problem lies, in terms of balance.

Then again, this sort of argument is nigh-absurd given the premise here. You can't downgrade whatever is the de facto supporting cast just because Platini – or Messi – has to stand out as the main man. It's an unlimited, all-time draft. Some slack must be cut. Besides, Messi is very much used to operating in a system where he often didn't do much string pulling at all, but focused on finishing attacks rather than starting them – which is what I suspect he'd do here too, whilst leaving the bulk of the orchestrating to Platini.

But, yeah – the overall balance. I dunno. Something off there, I think, if we're being super critical (which we have to be, I suppose).

Aye, there's a balance to be struck between fielding the quality of player needed for an all-time draft and maintaining balance. The more I think about though I reckon Invictus and Theon have struck gold with the Messi/Platini combination in terms of compatibility. Yes, they're both accustomed to being the undisputed main man, but Messi's got a great track record of being able to play with all sorts of other big names to the detriment of no-one - a playmaking hub like Xavi, a great AM in Iniesta, and latterly with Neymar and Suarez too. Its only really Ibrahimovic that outright struggled with Messi, and a few others such as David Villa who clearly had to limit his game to fit in with Messi. The other great plus point IMO is that Platini not only dropped very deep but tended to stay so central. With Messi doing so much of his best work starting from wide areas they won't be stepping on other's toes as often as, say, Platini and Maradona might.
 
Aye, there's a balance to be struck between fielding the quality of player needed for an all-time draft and maintaining balance. The more I think about though I reckon Invictus and Theon have struck gold with the Messi/Platini combination in terms of compatibility. Yes, they're both accustomed to being the undisputed main man, but Messi's got a great track record of being able to play with all sorts of other big names to the detriment of no-one - a playmaking hub like Xavi, a great AM in Iniesta, and latterly with Neymar and Suarez too. Its only really Ibrahimovic that outright struggled with Messi, and a few others such as David Villa who clearly had to limit his game to fit in with Messi. The other great plus point IMO is that Platini not only dropped very deep but tended to stay so central. With Messi doing so much of his best work starting from wide areas they won't be stepping on other's toes as often as, say, Platini and Maradona might.

I agree with this but you are forgetting that Van Basten is also in the mix here. Not sure he is the kind of striker who would vacate the central area for Messi.