That's admirable and idealistic. But if we're comparing attacking threat, we have the best player on the park in Tom Finney and a better version of Rush in Jimmy Greaves banging in the goals. We also have Alan Morton, like Gallacher a great of the pre-WW2 age, and one who stacks up comfortably to Bale and trumps him in terms of trickery, invention and legacy. And in Alex James, a natural number 10 - perhaps the first ever - who is regarded by many of the Arse persuasion as their greatest ever.
British + Irish Draft (Gio vs crappy) Group A
- Thread starter Edgar Allan Pillow
- Start date
Alex James' scoring record is decidedly average for a number 10. 26 in 231 for Arsenal, in an era where Dean almost scored a goal per game. I have never seen Arsenal supporters list him ahead of Bergkamp, let alone as their greatest ever player. You can argue that he is primary going toe creating but you would still want your player behind the striker to score more and provide a presence in the box when needed.
I agree very much - in general. There is a tendency to focus far too much on some sort of "formula" which must be adhered to in order to build a side which functions. And it's bollocks - clearly so.
However, in this particular match, with this particular set-up, I don't think you'll get away with fielding that duo in the middle of the park. Something is lacking there. What you'd expect from a CM duo in that set-up is for them to form an engine, if you will, and I don't think they're ideally suited for that.
Baxter has qualities you need here - but I don't think he'll be able to unleash those qualities effectively while being one half of a duo like that. It's not about the lack of a destroyer - it's more about overall balance and utilization of the qualities at your disposal.
Well it depends if you want a creative number 10 (Zidane, Iniesta) or a goalscoring number 10 (Rivaldo, Lampard, Rooney). I'm comfortable with James feeding Morton, Greaves and Finney - that trio oozes firepower and only want service.
As for how Alex James is regarded by Arsenal fans...
When a diminutive Scottish footballer from a tough mining village became the kingpin in Herbert Chapman's legendary Arsenal line-up between the wars, he set the seal on a footballing career that is still talked about today. Arguably the finest inside forward of all time, the official history of the Football Association describes him as, 'a little midfield genius'. 'No-one like him ever kicked a ball', George Allison, who succeeded Herbert Chapman as Arsenal manager, said. 'He simply left the opposition looking on his departing figure with amazement'. From his deep-lying inside-forward position, James was the creative hub of the classic Arsenal team of the 1930's, collecting the ball from defenders, then spraying passes to either wing. One of Scotland's 'Wembley Wizards' who humiliated England 5-1 at Wembley, two years later he helped Arsenal win the FA Cup for the first time. "The Times" reported: 'The skill and bold tactics of James that turned the scale in favour of his side'. But James also had a knack of making his name known outside footballing circles. 'Wee Alex' was a genius with his feet, a comedian with baggy shorts and flapping shirt sleeves, who could set the crowd in a roar, an argumentative and sometimes stubborn man with a ready wit and a talent for publicity. James' often difficult life and his dazzling career are recounted here in lively detail - from his first boots (bought by an elder brother) and the struggle towards his first professional games with Raith Rovers in 1922, to the magic moment when Herbert Chapman signed him up for Arsenal for the princely sum of GBP 9,000 - an action that bound him to the club, then the epitome of footballing glamour, even after Chapman's death and his own retirement from first-class football. In this lively, profusely illustrated biography, John Harding has drawn on the recollections of men and women who knew James well, both on and off the pitch, as well as writers and journalists down the years, to vividly recreate the life and times of a remarkable man and one of the greatest players in the history of the game.
Last edited:
I knew that gollum jibe would cost me anto's vote.
It did actually. It was a bonus it also drew a game I still see as a draw (but if anyone wins it I do think it's most likely Gio). Maybe if you are a good boy I remove it.
Well the game isn't drawn now.
Unfortunately you can't remove it, can only switch it so it will be as is I guess.Well the game isn't drawn now.
8-8? Its a draw, no?
Nope someone from the same group voted for crappy I think, so that vote doesn't count.
Was 8-7 then , 9-8 now to Gio.
Nope stobzilla has not voted
Oh ok. Looks like this one is going right down the wire.
Still think its odd that a manager and an AM can both get a vote, basically allowing that "team" to vote twice and potentially decide a winner elsewhere 
Guess I'm the only one that thinks that.
This one is gonna be close either way though.
Guess I'm the only one that thinks that.
This one is gonna be close either way though.
Still think its odd that a manager and an AM can both get a vote, basically allowing that "team" to vote twice and potentially decide a winner elsewhere
Guess I'm the only one that thinks that.
This one is gonna be close either way though.
I see yer point - but the question is whether this can actually be used for tactical purposes. I don't see how it could at first glance: Later on, certainly, but not at this stage.
Still think its odd that a manager and an AM can both get a vote, basically allowing that "team" to vote twice and potentially decide a winner elsewhere
Guess I'm the only one that thinks that.
This one is gonna be close either way though.
I guess it is based on the assumption that folks won't play strategy. Otherwise why allow any manager a vote at all? If people started voting off teams for their own game, the whole draft system will pretty much collapse.
Ofcourse it can be used tactically if someone wishes it so, you could try to vote off teams whose players you want for yourself.
Not very gentlemanly, though, is it? But yes - sure. Someone could do that. Which begs a rather obvious question, seeing as you're the one running this thing - eh?
Didnt want to start any issues...and im definitely not insinuating that barney and joga plotted anything here. Just a quandry on my part since if this game is won by one vote, that team basically decided the outcome.
the difference between having any manager able to vote is that they have one vote. Instead of now a manager and assistant each getting a vote.
But like I said, didnt mean to start an uproar just an observation I typed out loud.
the difference between having any manager able to vote is that they have one vote. Instead of now a manager and assistant each getting a vote.
But like I said, didnt mean to start an uproar
just an observation I typed out loud.As explained , it has always been this way. If we start banning votes, we will get about 10 votes total in a match up. The whole draft business on caf is pretty much held up by the fact that people vote honestly and not strategically. Not to mention, no one is going to call up his mates to vote for him and win a game. Once you question these things or if someone starts playing dishonestly, there is no point holding this thing anymore.
Didnt want to start any issues...and im definitely not insinuating that barney and joga plotted anything here. Just a quandry on my part since if this game is won by one vote, that team basically decided the outcome.
the difference between having any manager able to vote is that they have one vote. Instead of now a manager and assistant each getting a vote.
But like I said, didnt mean to start an uproar
That's based on assumption that managers are voting tactically. If they are, then that's unfortunate IMO. I don't think Barney and Joga are co-coordinating their votes either. In the past AMs and managers have voted differently.
I agree, by all means. I just found your response a bit odd, given that you're the one calling the shots here. Never mind that, though - we're on the same page, I reckon.
I was just clarifying that that it is possible to play tactically rather than honestly.
I understand, man - no worries.
My view is that it's either no managers are allowed to vote or they all are. I'd expect/hope that managers are big enough to not vote tactically to knock out teams they want to face. In an open draft like this, it's not something I would expect to happen. In a draft with a lot of restrictions where only one or two teams stand to benefit from a set of players getting knocked out, then yes we really should be aware and guard against it. I certainly wouldn't be limiting it to no AMs allowed to vote - that would only be appropriate if we assume managers are voting tactically. We also have a limited pool who do vote, and an even smaller pool with sufficient knowledge of the vast player pool to make a decent call. And I'd add that some of the AMs are often draft experts who don't necessarily have the time to run a team, but whose knowledge and expertise would neverthless be beneficial in discussing and voting on other games.Still think its odd that a manager and an AM can both get a vote, basically allowing that "team" to vote twice and potentially decide a winner elsewhere
Guess I'm the only one that thinks that.
This one is gonna be close either way though.
so @antohan can switch his vote now to make it a draw like he wanted
Well I remember how hard a time I got for having Davids, Xavi and Platini as a central midfield trio, despite Davids' defensive warhorse abilities, Xavi's unparalleled engine and natural inclination to stay deep, and Platini's ability to drop deep and dictate.so @antohan can switch his vote now to make it a draw like he wanted
We've had these discussions before and I'm pretty sure we once tried banning managers and AMs from voting until they were eliminated... It was a stupid idea, all you had was less votes overall and less activity. Then only a few weeks ago we had managers counting double.
I'd rather risk the extraordinary "one vote that makes the difference" scenario once in a blue moon and have a shot at competing for the other 15-20 votes in every game.
Part of the plan here is to instruct Jimmy Greaves to lean onto Steve Bruce.
Bruce was a fine centre-half for United, a great leader and brilliant in the air. He'd be in his element up against a Charles or McGrory. But nippy strikers were something he struggled with from time to time. Look at the carnage Romario caused when they turned United over 4-0 in the Champions League. And in Jimmy Greaves we have the closest thing to Romario ever produced in the UK and Ireland. They're both quick, deadly on the turn and immaculate finishers.
So here we have England's greatest ever goalscorer up against probably the only player in the entire draft without an international cap.
Obviously we can't forget Ferdinand, but then we will have Finney overloading, Morton bursting through from the left, James running through relatively unchallenged from midfield, all occupying Crappy's back four. And Greaves just needs a sniff, a half-yard, and it's a goal.
Bruce was a fine centre-half for United, a great leader and brilliant in the air. He'd be in his element up against a Charles or McGrory. But nippy strikers were something he struggled with from time to time. Look at the carnage Romario caused when they turned United over 4-0 in the Champions League. And in Jimmy Greaves we have the closest thing to Romario ever produced in the UK and Ireland. They're both quick, deadly on the turn and immaculate finishers.
So here we have England's greatest ever goalscorer up against probably the only player in the entire draft without an international cap.
Obviously we can't forget Ferdinand, but then we will have Finney overloading, Morton bursting through from the left, James running through relatively unchallenged from midfield, all occupying Crappy's back four. And Greaves just needs a sniff, a half-yard, and it's a goal.
It would be one thing if Bruce was playing as a full back and was straight up against Greaves. That's not the case here at all. He is part of back two that will be facing up against a single striker.
From what I gather so far-
- You have Romario II in your team
- You have a player with a scoring ratio of 0.1 but who is someone who revolutionized the number 10 role or something or is possibly Arsenal's best player ever.
- You have two midfielders who who will not only take care of someone like Baxter but also contribute to attack
- Scotaland's best centerback ever
- Possibly the best left winger in entire draft
I get it that everyone exaggerated their team to get the votes in but some of this stuff is OTT. Like I said before, either you actually thing that your team is final ready or you are giving a false impression to everyone. Regardless it is simply not true.
- You have Romario II in your team -
Top scorer in the English top tier a record six times and England's fourth highest international goalscorer with 44 goals in just 57 games. Tottenham Hotspur's highest ever goalscorer (268 goals), the highest goalscorer in the history of English top-flight football (357 goals), and has also scored more hat-tricks (six) for England than anyone else. Supreme finisher, likely the best the British game has ever seen, who was quick, always found space and always made the right decision.
George Best said: "People remember him primarily as a goal-poacher, but he was a tremendous dribbler too. He scored one goal for Spurs against us at White Hart Lane where he beat half the team, including the goalkeeper, before rolling it into an empty net."
Graham Taylor said: "He was so quick with his feet and he had the ability to link the play so well, not only scoring so many goals but creating for those around him."
- You have a player with a scoring ratio of 0.1 but who is someone who revolutionized the number 10 role or something or is possibly Arsenal's best player ever.
Alex James' career record is 106 goals in 476 games. Zidane's? 95 in 506. Iniesta's? 33 in 344. Frankly I don't want another heavy goalscorer there - not when you've got Greaves and Finney up front. That role cries out for a creator and Alex James, by many people's accounts, was one of the best. He's estimated to have served up around 50 assists one season. Whether that's right or wrong, it's clear he possesses some of the finest passing and vision qualities in the draft.
- You have two midfielders who who will not only take care of someone like Baxter but also contribute to attack
They're both all-rounders. Meiklejohn and Baxter are the two greatest midfielders Rangers have produced. Meiklejohn's job is to take care of Baxter - he's got the nous, discipline and leadership to have a good stab at it.
- Scotaland's best centerback ever
It's important to remember that Willie Miller kept the great Alan Hansen out of the Scotland team. Now Hansen has the better club career, and I'd have loved to have got him in the team, but the testimony of Alex Ferguson - "best penalty box defender in the world" - and Rummenigge - "best I've ever played against" isn't me talking.
- Possibly the best left winger in entire draft
Best takes that title. And you'd probably take Giggs next. But Morton's very highly regarded and there's a reason why Chester was so keen to get him. Again I'm only going on the quotes of others who put him up as one of Britain's greatest ever wingers.
Top scorer in the English top tier a record six times and England's fourth highest international goalscorer with 44 goals in just 57 games. Tottenham Hotspur's highest ever goalscorer (268 goals), the highest goalscorer in the history of English top-flight football (357 goals), and has also scored more hat-tricks (six) for England than anyone else. Supreme finisher, likely the best the British game has ever seen, who was quick, always found space and always made the right decision.
George Best said: "People remember him primarily as a goal-poacher, but he was a tremendous dribbler too. He scored one goal for Spurs against us at White Hart Lane where he beat half the team, including the goalkeeper, before rolling it into an empty net."
Graham Taylor said: "He was so quick with his feet and he had the ability to link the play so well, not only scoring so many goals but creating for those around him."
- You have a player with a scoring ratio of 0.1 but who is someone who revolutionized the number 10 role or something or is possibly Arsenal's best player ever.
Alex James' career record is 106 goals in 476 games. Zidane's? 95 in 506. Iniesta's? 33 in 344. Frankly I don't want another heavy goalscorer there - not when you've got Greaves and Finney up front. That role cries out for a creator and Alex James, by many people's accounts, was one of the best. He's estimated to have served up around 50 assists one season. Whether that's right or wrong, it's clear he possesses some of the finest passing and vision qualities in the draft.
- You have two midfielders who who will not only take care of someone like Baxter but also contribute to attack
They're both all-rounders. Meiklejohn and Baxter are the two greatest midfielders Rangers have produced. Meiklejohn's job is to take care of Baxter - he's got the nous, discipline and leadership to have a good stab at it.
- Scotaland's best centerback ever
It's important to remember that Willie Miller kept the great Alan Hansen out of the Scotland team. Now Hansen has the better club career, and I'd have loved to have got him in the team, but the testimony of Alex Ferguson - "best penalty box defender in the world" - and Rummenigge - "best I've ever played against" isn't me talking.
- Possibly the best left winger in entire draft
Best takes that title. And you'd probably take Giggs next. But Morton's very highly regarded and there's a reason why Chester was so keen to get him. Again I'm only going on the quotes of others who put him up as one of Britain's greatest ever wingers.
That's plain ridiculous since you have used his second division record at Preston to beef up his scoring stat. I quoted his scoring record at Arsenal which is the most relevant.
TBH, if you go down that path it's not just votes but opinions that matter. I certainly have had many a manager in the past complaining my having a go at their team carried more weight than the single vote. Someone (Annah?) once argued I held some sort of draft Iron Throne in determining games, which was of course nonsense (I actually looked back and in that draft most times the guy I didn't vote for had won
). I've always actually found that when I get too one-sided/full retard in criticising a side, that draws out other esteemed draft pundits defending that team, and probably the occasional sympathy vote for the poor sod.It's all part and parcel and not worth being paranoid about. There certainly is tactical voting of sorts, whether conscious or not, but it is usually a PR, not a selfish consideration. One thing that happens regularly is managers not voting in other games while their own is going on or managers chickening out of voting altogether if their vote determines the outcome of a game (:cough: Gio :cough). Why does this happen? It's actually a really interesting dynamic and a great case of Game Theory:
Caveat 1: tight/competitive games, people know votes in one-sided games just add to the carnage, it is under competitive conditions that tactics and reactions come to the fore.
Caveat 2: you have to assume honest voting/loyalty/rewarding votes etc. isn't in play, people only act with self-interest in mind and as a one-off.
Caveat 3: it's not necessarily a case of all four voting tactically and thinking it through, but acting on prior experience/learning/perceived outcomes.
Game 1, A vs. B. Game 2, C vs. D. Everyone too busy with their own games, not getting embroiled in other games just in case it backfires... Then the votes dry up and you start noticing none of you have voted... until one of them does...
A votes for C in the other game, now C doesn't return the favour because he would like Bs vote, but D is now free to go vote B and maybe get his vote to cancel out As vote for his rival. He has nothing to lose. So D votes for B hoping to get parity, but B is still hoping for Cs vote and vice-versa. They have no incentive to act as so far they have been favoured by this all, why risk imbalancing? So they keep staring at each other, but neither winds up voting unless one game finishes first. At that point one of them has to make a call because the other one will be able to vote later with no risk of retaliation. If Game 1 finishes first, B could vote D as a reward, which forces C to make a last gasp move so that, at the very least, he has even chances. In practice, A started it all but is now the only mug who didn't get an additional vote! Worse, he has now fabricated two votes for his rival! Own goal if there ever was one. If Game 2 finishes first then A is a vote down and has 50-50 chance on the other.
And that's why people rationally, or based on past experience/intuitively, know they should steer clear of voting in concurrent competitive games
With that in mind, the most clever ploy I've seen was Theon/Tito a few drafts ago, they always invariably voted differently in every game so their net impact was zero, but both managers had reasons to have sympathy for one of them. That certainly should be very effective, not necessarily in the rational Game Theory world but in the real world where people do have emotions and not just a brain.
@Balu the mathematician, enjoy
Last edited:
Why does it matter if another manager wanted him? Chester has a hard on for all vintage players anyway. I have used players' quotes myself but they can't be used as the absolute truth. Several ridiculous quotes and proclamations by modern players era testament to that.
This will probably win me no votes but I simply don't buy that someone like Morton was any better than Bale. The latter has performed as well as any one for Spurs in his last 2 seasons and Madrid in his debut one, scoring so many critical goals and carrying a team like Spurs. It is just the romanticism that certain people/posters have with older/unknown players that leds to them being overrated. Not to mention the fact that flaws of modern players are mercilessly exposed by every single match being there on record.
TBH, if you go down that path it's not just votes but opinions that matter. I certainly have had many a manager in the past complaining my having a go at their team carried more weight than the single vote. Someone (Annah?) once argued I held some sort of draft Iron Throne in determining games, which was of course nonsense (I actually looked back and in that draft most times the guy I didn't vote for had won
It's all part and parcel and not worth being paranoid about. There certainly is tactical voting of sorts, whether conscious or not, but it is usually a PR, not a selfish consideration. One thing that happens regularly is managers not voting in other games while their own is going on or managers chickening out of voting altogether if their vote determines the outcome of a game (:cough: Gio :cough
Caveat 1: tight/competitive games, people know votes in one-sided games just add to the carnage, it is under competitive conditions that tactics and reactions come to the fore.
Caveat 2: you have to assume honest voting/loyalty/rewarding votes etc. isn't in play, people only act with self-interest in mind and as a one-off.
Caveat 3: it's not necessarily a case of all four voting tactically and thinking it through, but acting on prior experience/learning/perceived outcomes.
Game 1, A vs. B. Game 2, C vs. D. Everyone too busy with their own games, not getting embroiled in other games just in case it backfires... Then the votes dry up and you start noticing none of you have voted... until one of them does...
A votes for C in the other game, now C doesn't return the favour because he would like Bs vote, but D is now free to go vote B and maybe get his vote to cancel out As vote for his rival. He has nothing to lose. So D votes for B hoping to get parity, but B is still hoping for Cs vote and vice-versa. They have no incentive to act as so far they have been favoured by this all, why risk imbalancing? So they keep staring at each other, but neither winds up voting unless one game finishes first. At that point one of them has to make a call because the other one will be able to vote later with no risk of retaliation. If Game 1 finishes first, B could vote D as a reward, which forces C to make a last gasp move so that, at the very least, he has even chances. In practice, A started it all but is now the only mug who didn't get an additional vote! Worse, he has now fabricated two votes for his rival! Own goal if there ever was one. If Game 2 finishes first then A is a vote down and has 50-50 chance on the other.
And that's why people rationally, or based on past experience/intuitively, know they should steer clear of voting in concurrent competitive games
With that in mind, the most clever ploy I've seen was Theon/Tito a few drafts ago, they always invariably voted differently in every game so their net impact was zero, but both managers had reasons to have sympathy for one of them. That certainly should be very effective, not necessarily in the rational Game Theory world but in the real world where people do have emotions and not just a brain.
@Balu the mathematician, enjoy
I actually wanted to make a rule before the games started that every manager must vote in every draft game or they risk getting penalties such as -1 votes. But forgot to announce it before the first one started so meh.
* I reckon the Romario comparison is quite apt, actually - extremely dangerous finisher with a deadly change of pace on him. The dribbling praise from Best is a little harder to simply take as gospel, though - I wouldn't say Greaves is universally recognized as a great dribbler.
* As for Morton I'd say there is no doubt whatsoever that he's one of the very best left wingers in the draft, if not THE best if we count...er THE Best as being less of a specialist (and he was, of course - he could play on either wing and more).
* I don't get the criticism of James: He wasn't a goal scorer but a provider - that's not a weakness in his game (to regard his goal scoring record as a weakness makes no sense), it's par for the course given the (unusual at the time) role he played.
* If anything I think Gio has made shockingly little of the best player on the pitch (a man who hasn't been bigged up much at all here) and that ain't Greaves, or Morton, or James.
* As for crappy's side, the main problem is obvious and for my money he has done extremely well here in spite of it: That central midfield duo simply is not what it's being sold as in the write-up. Neither Baxter nor Peters are "complete" midfielders - they are both clearly better going forward than holding back and Baxter is anything but a work horse to boot.
* As for Morton I'd say there is no doubt whatsoever that he's one of the very best left wingers in the draft, if not THE best if we count...er THE Best as being less of a specialist (and he was, of course - he could play on either wing and more).
* I don't get the criticism of James: He wasn't a goal scorer but a provider - that's not a weakness in his game (to regard his goal scoring record as a weakness makes no sense), it's par for the course given the (unusual at the time) role he played.
* If anything I think Gio has made shockingly little of the best player on the pitch (a man who hasn't been bigged up much at all here) and that ain't Greaves, or Morton, or James.
* As for crappy's side, the main problem is obvious and for my money he has done extremely well here in spite of it: That central midfield duo simply is not what it's being sold as in the write-up. Neither Baxter nor Peters are "complete" midfielders - they are both clearly better going forward than holding back and Baxter is anything but a work horse to boot.
I have no interest in beefing up his scoring record. As said I don't want another goalscorer in that role within this team. He could be 1 in 20 for all I care - it's his creativity that's important.
Regardless of the fact he got into NT ahead of Hansen, I doubt anyone would have Miller ahead of Hansen. Look at someone like Redondo, he got not much love at NT level as well, does not say anything about his quality.
The only relevant bit here is the your CB duo going up against Rush and Rooney. I am pretty happy with that match up. Infact your defenders have a harder job than Rio + Bruce against Greaves.
There's not a lot of point in doing an all-time draft if we aren't going to fairly recognise the pre-TV era boys. It's not as if we're inundated with them in any case, a sprinkling of the finest in the first half of the century - hell you've got one of your own in Patsy.
I don't think that's right, unless you enable the draw vote option. Even then, these games come thick and fast and you can't expect everyone's life to revolve around making sure they have seen every game and voted in it. I'm sure I missed quite a few here, and it's not like I don't chip in where I can.
Sure I do - sure.
I try to keep an open mind, as they say - about all sorts of players from all sorts of eras. Classy comment, that - you're coming across as a paragon of magnanimity here, I must say.
All great number 10s have a decent goal scoring record and nothing as bad as the ratio of 1 in 10. Zidane has a record of 1 in 5, Platini 1 in 2, Riquelme at his peak around 1 in 4/5. I see no evidence to suggest that James is someone who is going to decide this match in anyway.