Last edited:
Fantasy Draft: MJJ vs Annahmoss
- Thread starter crappycraperson
- Start date
Has scholes ever played as a box to box midfielder?
Yes he has, for the major part of his career next to Keane.
Maradona destroyed some of the greatest defenses in history alone and here is up against a defensive line much worse than those. If Cabrini, Vierchowod, Bergomi and Scirea who are all legends couldn't keep Maradona from scoring then I don't see how Puyol, Chiellini, Zabaleta and Sorin would accomplish it.
Maradona destroyed some of the greatest defenses in history alone and here is up against a defensive line much worse than those. If Cabrini, Vierchowod, Bergomi and Scirea who are all legends couldn't keep Maradona from scoring then I don't see how Puyol, Chiellini, Zabaleta and Sorin would accomplish it.
He will also have the defensive wall of Dunga-Silva. Pretty much the best defensive combo you can ask for to shield the back 4.
Scholes while is not exactly playing as a LCM here, hated that role and under performed massively when used at left for England. I am not sure which version of Scholes is playing here and which one is suited to. Post 2006 one is not since you mentioned box to box. So that would be Scholes circa 99 mainly. Even in 2002 he played behind the striker, a role he won't get to play with Diego. I think he is completely wasted in this formation.
Mendieta is fine since he could play out wide more comfortably than Scholes
Also Diego called Lothar his toughest rival.
Sammer would clearly need to stay in defense here, he is not needed in MF and with two strikers about he be more handy as a CB
The issue is that MJJ's side is clearly flawed. Just seems broken with no real strings holding together all the players. I just don't know what to make of it. Giggs+Sorin combo with Drogs and Romario waiting in the middle is the thing that stands out a bit.
Actually Scirea did keep him out, it was Baresi and Maldini who got raped.
Sorry @antohan , I didn't bring it up myself.
@crappycraperson Scholes is playing as a box to box CM in a three man midfield not as a left midfielder. The central midfielders in a 5-3-2 were most commonly regular central midfielders rather than any pseudo wide midfielders.
He did that a lot of times in his career when we played with three midfielders in tough CL games. He is just playing exactly like he would next to Keane but with a playmaker in front of him who will take the playmaking burden.
He did that a lot of times in his career when we played with three midfielders in tough CL games. He is just playing exactly like he would next to Keane but with a playmaker in front of him who will take the playmaking burden.
Actually Scirea did keep him out, it was Baresi and Maldini who got raped.
Sorry @antohan , I didn't bring it up myself.
Group stage 1986 WC. Maradona scored in the 34th minute up against:
DF2Giuseppe Bergomi
DF3Antonio Cabrini
DF6Gaetano Scirea (c)
DF8Pietro Vierchowod
That Italian team had plenty of issues though, both on the pitch and behind the scenes. Nowhere near the sort of cohesion they had in the previous WC. Scirea kept Diego out when Napoli met Juventus.
The point is what exactly is he actually adding to the MF here.
The box to box version pre 99 is not going to contribute much defensively. People forget that even in 99, Butt played alongside Keane as much as Scholes did. And Fergie even sidelined Scholes for a while when he bought Veron.
Schles 99 is largely overrated by United fans anyway. For me it goes like Scholes 06- > Scholes 02-04 > Scholes 99-01
He adds offensive brilliance, great finisher, intelligent, great link-up play and so forth. I already have Sammer and Deschamps behind him.
I have voted Annah. MJJ's side just seems a tad disjointed is all, sorry.
That's all the things you associate with someone playing a no,10 role or a pure AM role. The thing IMO Scholes is not someone like Seedorf who could play the bride to Kaka and make an impact from a secondary position.
Anyway I have made my point and I still see Scholes-b2b not fitting in here.
It's pointless anyway since this will be a landslide. The other team is the weakest in the draft so far.
This is why we shouldn't have stand-in managers. Walkinhop had constructed a side revolving around Balakov. Brave, sure, but he was willing to fight his corner and rightly so.
He is on the bench. Heartbreaking stuff.
He is on the bench. Heartbreaking stuff.
I think the Sammer / Deschamps axis makes sense (see Eilts/Sammer), Mendieta is a good fit for the central-midfielder-breaking-wide role, while Klinsmann dovetails Maradona nicely. Where it breaks down is Scholes who was never really happy doing that job for Eriksson's England. For MJJ, the system makes more sense and Silva/Dunga are a gritty space-squeezing combination who fit the demands of this match well. Then Vierchowod is perhaps the single centre-half in the draft who might be able to quell Romario.
Just for reference, this is what I understand was walkinhop's plan (albeit, not knowing his opponent yet).
When we first discussed his team:
What seemed to be his plan after he started getting giddy with options (and looking forward to add Stoichkov if possible).
Quite clearly heading to a WC'94 All-Star spine
When we first discussed his team:
What seemed to be his plan after he started getting giddy with options (and looking forward to add Stoichkov if possible).
Quite clearly heading to a WC'94 All-Star spine
I supppose once Mascherano was out the Barca trio thing at the base of the spine wasn't so compelling so Chiellini probably would have played then.
Yeah, I havent heard of balakov so didnt include him. Went with what I know. He has three strikers, two AMs, three DMs and two wingers so had no idea what he wanted to play.
In the end, I dont think it would have made that much of a difference.
It seems Stoichkov gets all the retrosepctive plaudits from the tasty mid-90s Bulgaria team when Balakov's role was pretty central to most of what they did well.
It's one reason I was looking forward to seeing him on the pitch. Very tough draw, and he would likely struggle with Deschamps and Sammer there, but walkin was adamant he would stick up for him throughout.
@MJJ I have no idea what Romerito is doing on the pitch though and Drogba-Romario were never meant to play together. I understand though, the only reason I know what his plans where was I couldn't work out what he wanted Romerito for (or Suker for that matter) so I asked.
Just recieved a pm from @Physiocrat who was in discussion with walking.
Apparently he liked the idea of playing like the czech side so here it goes. Personally I think its suicide against annah's side but its not like the 4-2-2-2 is doing any good. So might as well play the side as walking wanted.
@crappycraperson can you put this in the OP please.
It's one reason I was looking forward to seeing him on the pitch. Very tough draw, and he would likely struggle with Deschamps and Sammer there, but walkin was adamant he would stick up for him throughout.
@MJJ I have no idea what Romerito is doing on the pitch though and Drogba-Romario were never meant to play together. I understand though, the only reason I know what his plans where was I couldn't work out what he wanted Romerito for (or Suker for that matter) so I asked.
I played him over ljunberg who I dont really rate and I read he could do a job from there, was described like a messi type player when he played on the wing so thought cant be that bag. Plus with dunga/silva/giggs I needed someone to cut inside and provide creativity.
FWIW, Puyol and Chiellini wouldn't do too badly against Klinsmann. Dunga-Mauro Silva would have their work cut out but are an excellent pair. Sorin and Zabaleta would have a far better game than either of Annah's fullbacks. Sorín along with Giggs and Balakov would tear a new one into Jorginho, Buchwald would spend all game supporting him, but there would be enough crosses for Drogba to end up nailing one. I can't see Romario having much joy so woould have played the 4-3-3 and try nick a 1-0 old Mourinho style.
That said, I can understand the horrendous scoreline as an aggregate of indiivdual decisions.
@MJJ I think Drogba was the only one who could nick a goal here given how many exceptional defenders and man-markers Annah has to throw at Romario (let alone Suker). Silva was also more important than Dunga in this game.
That said, I can understand the horrendous scoreline as an aggregate of indiivdual decisions.
@MJJ I think Drogba was the only one who could nick a goal here given how many exceptional defenders and man-markers Annah has to throw at Romario (let alone Suker). Silva was also more important than Dunga in this game.
Yeah thats why I played drogba over an AM initially as he is the ideal striker if you are sitting back and just kicking the ball forward at the striker and played a double pivot in silva and dunga to combat maradona. Romario was needed to add a bit of star power to gain votes, I wanted to play all three DMs just to make it hell for Annah
But walking didnt have a good enough RW to go with a Giggs-Drogba-RW attack.
Physio pmed me that team with a choice between droga and suker as the second striker, and as you mentioned that suker would be a better partner for romario than drogba, I decided to go with that.
I got a vote
A 5-3-2 is not like a diamond where you often expect the central midfielders to work in the wide areas as well. Scholes is playing a centre midfielder box to box role, he won't go wide, he doesn't start out wide.
The full-backs provide the width, Mendieta being capable to go out wide is a bonus rather than a requirement.
Scholes will play exactly the same as he did with Keane, but Maradona will be the teams main playmaker. When he is bombing forward he still has Sammer and Deschamps behind him, instead of just Keane.
I am definitely buying Scholes more in the midfield three of a 3-5-2 / 5-3-2 set-up rather than a diamond. I'm pretty sure Hoddle's England did that quite well. I suppose it's the lines on Scholes and Mendieta rather than Sergi and Jorginho that give the impression they'll be holding back while Scholes drives on.
Against Giggs and Ljungberg I just didn't want to use arrows on the full-backs, ideally I'd have it on both. But it was bound to cause even worse confusion if people thought they were wing-backs which would give space for Giggs/Ljungberg.
Scholes is playing the role of Effenberg/Matthaus and the likes, rather than Mendieta/Seedorf/Gattuso.
United have played Scholes in a midfield three loads of times to great success throughout his career in CL matches especially.
Where?
I have absolutely no idea what he got Suker for. Drogba played his best football without a partner, the only chap to ever partner him effectively was Anelka, only because they somehow got him to be willing to play from wide areas. That clearly isn't Romario.I don't think Romario or Suker could do much at all in this game, your hope was rooftop football targetting Drogba IMO.
I agree with all this. You need to upgrade your fullbacks and make them more like wingbacks/midfield "carrileros" though.
It's one reason I was looking forward to seeing him on the pitch. Very tough draw, and he would likely struggle with Deschamps and Sammer there, but walkin was adamant he would stick up for him throughout.
@MJJ I have no idea what Romerito is doing on the pitch though and Drogba-Romario were never meant to play together. I understand though, the only reason I know what his plans where was I couldn't work out what he wanted Romerito for (or Suker for that matter) so I asked.
Where?
I don't think Romario or Suker could do much at all in this game, your hope was rooftop football targetting Drogba IMO.
That was the only other option, either partner him with suker or drogba. I went with suker in the latter tactic as walking wanted to play two strikers and the match was lost anyway.I think I might have had a chance if he had any other no 10 than maradona.
I would get rid of Scholes personally. He may win you votes though so perhaps not.
Who would do the offensive box-to-box role better though? I can upgrade the player to a Matthaus but he will do the same role, just better. I want to upgrade my full-backs or go for the Argentinian 3-5-2 like @antohan was speaking about for more width. Players like Effenberg and Matthaus thrived in these 5-3-2 formations, not the Seedorf/Cambiasso players.
There is no width involved in this role, it is a pure box to box role as a central midfielder.
Great team again annah.
Not sure what the issue with Scholes is here, clearly not being asked to play out on the left as people seem to be suggesting, am pretty sure it's the fullbacks who will be providing the width.
Not sure what the issue with Scholes is here, clearly not being asked to play out on the left as people seem to be suggesting, am pretty sure it's the fullbacks who will be providing the width.
Congrats @Annahnomoss Well deserved win.
Cheers mate, thanks for standing in you did a great job and put effort in. Even if it is hard to be motivated in such scenarios.
Thanks a lot mate.
Yeah, bit odd as I never stated anything like it and the arrows were forward rather than out wide. But that is how it works, will have to avoid the confusion the next time around.
I love the fact that even MJJ voted for Annah