Billy No Mates Draft

diarm said:
I noticed he did that earlier in the draft as well. I'm out now but at home I've been keeping a little table of minutes per pick. Whoever finishes last should have to play their matches in the infamous Grey kit of 96/97
Click to expand...
Feck it, I'll be propping up that table after yesterday.
 
Stobzilla said:
Edwards could conceivably play left back, left mid, centre mid. Masopust is more of a offensive minded box to box centre mid.
Click to expand...

Chesterlestreet said:
Formally speaking, you could say they were both left halves in terms of their primary position (in spite of being right footed, as such). But it hardly matters when they're used (as they will be, I presume) in a modern formation: I see no problem whatsoever with pairing them up in the middle of the park, playing whatever specific roles you assign to them. Both were extremely two-footed as well, which is a bonus

Masopust in his prime didn't play as an according-to-Hoyle left half anyway – he operated more as a genuine central midfielder of the modern kind even back then
Click to expand...

I had Masopust in Euros draft (I think). I thought of him as a attacking LCM primarily, left of a 4-3-3 his best fit. Have someone ahead to occupy defenders and let him make his amazing runs from the midfield.

As for Edwards, he's a bit more flexible. As far as articles depict him he can play anywhere in defence, midfield and even played as CF couple of time. But for me in a modern formation his best fit would be a left DM in 4-2-3-1 or a LCM in a 4-3-3 or a 4-4-2 diamond. Do we have any record of him playing as left back or a centre mid?
 
Breitner was my next pick.. Had my suspicion Joga would go for him. Then Schnellinger and Lahm also gets picked. :mad:
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
Do we have any record of him playing as left back or a centre mid?
Click to expand...

Depends, as always, on terms - old school versus modern. He played all over the pitch at various times - that was one of his claims to fame, his versatility.

There wasn't a "centre mid" role for him to play in the set-ups used back then, but the winghalf role which was his primary one IS that of a central midfielder more than anything, not least in the WM (where the centre half drops to form a trio at the back - and the winghalfs make up the central midfield behind the much more offensive, second-strikerish inside forwards).

Play him as a DM with license to bomb forward - and that's his ideal role in a modern set-up for me. Play him as a modern fullback - and he could probably do that very well, but it seems a bit of a waste.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
I had Masopust in Euros draft (I think). I thought of him as a attacking LCM primarily, left of a 4-3-3 his best fit. Have someone ahead to occupy defenders and let him make his amazing runs from the midfield.

As for Edwards, he's a bit more flexible. As far as articles depict him he can play anywhere in defence, midfield and even played as CF couple of time. But for me in a modern formation his best fit would be a left DM in 4-2-3-1 or a LCM in a 4-3-3 or a 4-4-2 diamond. Do we have any record of him playing as left back or a centre mid?
Click to expand...
You're overthinking the whole thing. Both are rightfooted players who can play central midfield roles. The fact that they played leftish despite being right footed just shows their versatility and both were good with their weaker foot as well. Masopust is as complete a box to box midfielder as you'll ever find. Him in a more attacking box to box role and Edwards a bit more defensive is a wonderfully balanced midfield.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
Play him as a DM with license to bomb forward - and that's his ideal role in a modern set-up for me. Play him as a modern fullback - and he could probably do that very well, but it seems a bit of a waste.
Click to expand...
You could always combine the two...
 
Could @mazhar13 please show up now and make his pick, so that everyone stops discussing our team and our tactical options :mad:.
 
Gio said:
You could always combine the two...
Click to expand...

Hehe, yeah - or that.

I have a .gif somewhere illustrating this particular option perfectly...

But on a more serious note, I think the notion that Edwards, a nominal (left) winghalf, would be mainly a lateral player in modern terms (that is, a left back or a left midfielder) - is generally misguided and based on a misunderstanding of what the old (wing)half role(s) actually implied: They were central players more than anything in spite of the name.

But in Edwards' particular case, yes - he could play, and play very well, as a modern left back, sure, why not? He has the skill set to make it work - but I would never field him as such if I had the chance to use him elsewhere. Di Stefano would probably do a cracking job as a left back too - but I wouldn't prefer him there either.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
Depends, as always, on terms - old school versus modern. He played all over the pitch at various times - that was one of his claims to fame, his versatility.

There wasn't a "centre mid" role for him to play in the set-ups used back then, but the winghalf role which was his primary one IS that of a central midfielder more than anything, not least in the WM (where the centre half drops to form a trio at the back - and the winghalfs make up the central midfield behind the much more offensive, second-strikerish inside forwards).

Play him as a DM with license to bomb forward - and that's his ideal role in a modern set-up for me. Play him as a modern fullback - and he could probably do that very well, but it seems a bit of a waste.
Click to expand...


I'm not sure or at least I haven't seen him(from sources that is) that he played on regular basis as a full back, or at least what we consider a full back position nowadays. He surely could fill in, like Neeskens in RB, but won't be his natural position and role. Obviously his qualities allowed him to play all over the pitch but I agree with you at a full back it seems like a waste.

He's not the same as Breitner for example at full back or some other players that played large percentages of their career at full back.
 
Enigma_87 said:
I'm not sure or at least I haven't seen him(from sources that is) that he played on regular basis as a full back, or at least what we consider a full back position nowadays. He surely could fill in, like Neeskens in RB, but won't be his natural position and role. Obviously his qualities allowed him to play all over the pitch but I agree with you at a full back it seems like a waste.

He's not the same as Breitner for example at full back or some other players that played large percentages of their career at full back.
Click to expand...

Neeskens did not fill in. He started his career at right back and did play there in 71 European cup before moving to midfield. He was better as a midfielder (same as Breitner) but 'not natural' would not be a correct description if played there.

If Edwards did play modern fullback, I'd expect him to be more like Breitner or ****** moving in and making plays rather than a touchline hugging overlap player.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
Neeskens did not fill in. He started his career at right back and did play there in 71 European cup before moving to midfield. He was better as a midfielder (same as Breitner) but 'not natural' would not be a correct description if played there.

If Edwards did play modern fullback, I'd expect him to be more like Breitner or ****** moving in and making plays rather than a touchline hugging overlap player.
Click to expand...

Neeskens was optional at full back at Ajax, he played there when their right back(deam keep forgetting not to put up names) was put on the left side when their LB was injured or was playing in front of him. Neeskens was snapped up by Ajax at very young age and was playing higher up the pitch as well. In the SF before the final you mentioned he was in midfield and scored a goal.
 
Last edited:
Look at you guys complain about me not being there while I was sleeping. I guess that's what happens when I'm at least 5 hours behind everyone else.
 
mazhar13 said:
Look at you guys complain about me not being there while I was sleeping. I guess that's what happens when I'm at least 5 hours behind everyone else.
Click to expand...

Ha! It's 2 o'clock in the afternoon in Toronto! :lol:
 
Sorry for the delay, guys. I'm just very surprised that he hasn't been picked yet. I've checked 3 times on the list to see if I was wrong, but nope, he isn't picked.

Ruud-Gullit-300x210.png



1. Joga Bonito - 1. Maradona 2. Krol 3. Thuram 4. Breitner 5. Stoichkov
2. Sjor Bepo/Viva Januzaj - 1. Messi 2. Keane 3. Charlton 4. Djalma Santos 5. Schnellinger
3. harms - 1. Pelé 2. P. Falcão 3. Rummenigge 4. Ferdinand 5. Lahm
4. mazhar13 - 1. Beckenbauer 2. Nilton Santos 3. Desailly 4. Conti 5. Gullit
5. Tuppet - 1. Alfredo Di Stéfano 2. Gerd Muller 3. Passarella 4. Jairzinho
6. Physiocrat - 1. Best 2. Neeskens 3. Luis Suarez Miramontes 4. Rivaldo
7. The Stain - 1. Luis Ronaldo 2. Džajić 3. Kohler 4. Nedved
8. Balu/crappy - 1. Eusébio 2. Scirea 3. Masopust 4. D. Edwards
9. Stobzilla - 1. Maldini 2. Moore 3. Carlos Alberto 4. M. Laudrup
10. RedTiger/Marty1968 - 1. Puskas 2. Matthaus 3. Gentile 4. Matthews
11. diarm - 1. C. Ronaldo 2. Zidane 3. Ronaldinho 4. Batistuta
12. Gio - 1. Zico 2. Facchetti 3. Nesta 4. Bozsik
13. Aldo - 1. Garrincha 2. Romário 3. Rivelino 4. Zanetti
14. EAP/Pat/Skizzo - 1. Figueroa 2. Rijkaard 3. van Hanegem 4. Brehme
15. Enigma_87/MJJ - 1. Johan Cruyff 2. Baresi 3. Figo 4. Henry
16. Invictus/ Theon - 1. Platini 2. Van Basten 3. Sammer 4. Redondo

I had to check again after posting this list here to make sure.

@Tuppet
 
Oh well. I started to believe and already came up with a plan how to fit him in :lol:.
 
Wait, Gullit played with Desailly at Milan when he returned in '94 for a few games. @mazhar13 I'm pretty sure you can't pick him.
 
Ah nvm, thought Gullit and Desailly shared a season wrongly. Carry on folks.

EDIT: Yeah looks like they did actually.
 
Physiocrat said:
  • Initial squads will be formed of 12 players
  • The only limitation is that none of the starting 11 can ever have played with each other at club or international level (the sub however can have played with one of the other starting 11 but can only be used as a sub if he replaces the player he played with, and obviously never played with anyone else).
Click to expand...
So nothing wrong. He just have to left one of them on the bench for the first round
 
you cant post a picture of Gullit without his long hair and get away with it, thats one of seven deadly sins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.