Eh? A WM if I ever saw one in these drafts.
Gio was playing on the counter all game, that's Eusebio territory. He lost.
Last edited:
Fantasy Tournament: World Cup All-Time All-Stars
- Thread starter Polaroid
- Start date
Eh? A WM if I ever saw one in these drafts.
Gio was playing on the counter all game, that's Eusebio territory. He lost.
Go, get on with it, pick Eusebio and carry on banking on clean sheets and somehow working out a goal based on shiny names upfront. It has worked so far, so why not?
When are you guys going to pick?
Theon is trying to work out your next pick. Can you post your final teamsheet so we can get on with this?
I've never laughed that hard at any forum post before. 
If we stick to the '86 analogy here, I don't see a problem with fielding Beckenbauer and Falcao in those roles. They're both more than capable of playing the roles of Burruchaga and Enrique - with the added bonus that they're a hell of sight better. It lacks an ideal candidate for the pure DM role (Batista '86) but the idea of letting Maradona be himself, as it were, with Beckenbauer and Falcao playing more "modestly" behind him is very appealing to me. Falcao is ideally suited for such a subtle role in my opinion. It's not far from what he did within the magic square - in many ways playing a brilliant second fiddle to Zico. And Beckenbauer is Beckenbauer. He doesn't have to orchestrate to shine - he'll shine in his own way regardless.
I never saw Eusebio as an out and out striker here in a 1-2 and I don't think that he would get into Zico's way all the time. I can easily see Müller creating space for one of Eusebio or Zico to run into, just like I can see Zico running into the space Eusebio opens up when he drops deeper. It's a very versatile attack, not perfectly complementary, I give you that, but far from a big problem, imo.
If you have Beckenbauer and Falcao only to turn the ball over, make a few off the ball runs and put a defensive shift in, how is that not reducing their influence on the game? Both can do so much more? And van Hanegem sticking to shackling Pele in comparison to Matthäus doing a job on Maradona? I don't like either, but the latter still stands a better chance to me and I really really rate van Hanegem's workrate.
I still don't understand why you can't see Theon scoring in possession, especially with Eusebio in the team as well. Never understood that in the last two games, but in case he picks Eusebio, I don't get it at all.
I don't disagree with any of that, I just don't get why it becomes a problem with Eusebio instead of Baggio in the team? And I'm really not sold on van Hanegem as a DM, if that's the only option to fit Maradona in.
Hehe. Not a bad player, was he? Such runs could be absolutely lethal with Maradona serving him.
Well, I'm probably far too hung up on this '86 formula now - but to me neither of those players are ideal with Maradona on the pitch. I'd rather team him up with a pure striker - an upgrade on Valdano, as it were. But by all means - these are fantastic footballers we're talking about here. Eusebio wouldn't look like a mug in any half plausible set-up - nor would Baggio.
I meant without Maradona. If Theon/Crappy pick Eusebio and play a 532 with Falcao, Beckenbauer - Zico - Eusebio, Müller.
I agree that it would be great to see Maradona in that setup, I've already said, it's a great way to do it, if you want to pick him. I'm just not sure if the price is too high, if you have to play van Hanegem as the DM and da Guia instead of Kohler.
I agree that it would be great to see Maradona in that setup, I've already said, it's a great way to do it, if you want to pick him. I'm just not sure if the price is too high, if you have to play van Hanegem as the DM and da Guia instead of Kohler.
Much more than nail down a clean sheet and tear apart the rival defensive setup with their runs and Maradona picking them out? Wow. What is the much more they do with Eusebio up there? Share the creation with Zico and him? Will it work? Do we know? The feck we do.
All-time World Cup draft, based on World Cup peak, and we are debating whether Maradona should be picked in a 3-5-2 that is primed for him. Incredible.
No one is saying van Hanegem would do a better job, and it doesn't really matter. Tell me you are sticking Matthaus on Maradona and I have good reason to think "Well, that won't end well, will it?". Tell me you are trying to limit Pelé by putting a pesky van Hanegem there to disrupt him and I will rate that higher than seeing Makelele there (bear in mind also van Hanegem's frame, well suited to limit Pelé's aerial impact).
Let's face it, no one can deal with either fully, but I'd rather lose van Hanegem on Pelé and deal with the occasions he shakes him off than lose Matthaus and still have to deal with occasions he is shaken off. One loses his best midfielder, the other doesn't. It's a bit like the last game were Beckenbauer was effectively wasted on Zizinho, but you couldn't quite leave Zizinho alone either, could you?
Beckenbauer on Charlton lost you Beckenbauer's impact in 66. Matthaus on Maradona lost you Matthaus, Maradona just dragged him deep and played the others through on goal against a defensive setup with a huge Matthaus-sized hole in it. You Germans never learn, do you? Don't waste your best midfielder on a chap who will still make an impact anyway, lose a comparative water-carrier on him!
The mental thing about it is that Beckenbauer, the misused player in '66, made the exact same mistake as a manager exactly 20 years later. I wanted to cry during that first half
. Förster called it his biggest regret that he wasn't allowed to mark Maradona until halftime and we almost got away with those shit first 45 minutes, scored the equaliser, but then, well, it was his tournament, so I guess it was always going to happen .Fair point, said it from the start, I have an irrational dislike for that 3-5-2 formation
.This is a legitimate concern, no doubt. But if you don't play Maradona, the question for me becomes: why the 3-5-2/5-3-2 at all? Can't these players be utilized in a better way with a different set-up? Annah played a 4-2-3-1 against you - now, we don't know if he will stick with that, but we do know that his likely upgrades/changes will be defensive. If he sports a 4-2-3-1 again I don't see any very heavy reasons for facing him with a 5-3-2. For me the one big reason for using that formation would be to get the absolute best out of Maradona.
Exactly.
And think about the other two CMs being "wasted" again. Say Matthaus is indeed doing a good job on Maradona... how the feck is Didí stopping Falcao and Beckenbauer running past him like he isn't even there?
The one thing I can't stand about this is we would have to put up with Aldo posting that clip of Maradona vs. Baresi. Again.
Exactly - of course if there were no restrictions we would play Maradona, but the rest of the team doesn't suit that move. It's not even a complicated thought process.
Are you mental? An attack of Zico/Eusebio/Muller, serviced by Falcao/Beckenbauer, and you're worried about scoring a goal? Nut job.
I knew there was something deep in my mind that forced me to argue against picking Maradona
. I feel sorry for Baresi./edit.
Wait, Annah hasn't even picked Baresi.
Picking Maradona? No, it isn't.
I knew there was something deep in my mind that forced me to argue against picking Maradona
/edit.
Wait, Annah hasn't even picked Baresi.
Maldini as a non-winner was prime real estate in case Theon got tangled up with his restrictions again. I've never seen someone make something so simple sound so complex.
Just to clarify, I'd never man mark Maradona with Matthäus. History already showed that it isn't the way to go.
I might use Charlton to man mark Beckenbauer though as there history has shown it does work well both in '66 and '70. It is not something I have thought about so far as I haven't started any write-up and the picks aren't done.
I might use Charlton to man mark Beckenbauer though as there history has shown it does work well both in '66 and '70. It is not something I have thought about so far as I haven't started any write-up and the picks aren't done.
As Balu has pointed out you're making things up again. Very odd.
The whole point of having Muller is so that he is the out and out striker, Eusebio would be playing his normal role. This is actually laughably ridiculous. I can't believe what I am reading here. Genuinely head scratching stuff.
Try and understand that Maradona would be the first name on the sheet in any team, but there are restrictions to work around. Sticking Van Hanegem into the midfield is an awful idea, dropping Kohler a worse one. Zico had a fantastic World Cup in '82, Eusebio an even better one in '66 - the team is more balanced that way and as a whole the better side.
Charlton didn't man-mark Beckenabuer, it was the other way around, but it effectively took Beckenbauer out of the game without Charlton requiring any instruction on him.
I'm starting to change my mind actually. Might be for sentimental reasons, because it would be sad if the final was played without Maradona on the pitch. Not entirely sure though.
Is that "being up there so it looks awesome"? Because he never played anything like this. And no, listing all the big names around him as "proof it will work" doesn't fly. He quite simply never played in a setting where you had midfielders bombing forward and a #10 pulling strings behind him. The name of the game for Eusebio is and always has been dropping deep, receiving in huge, unspoilt, open space between the lines and going on a driving run. It's all rather pointless if there are two players already capable of them runs and a #10 people are supposed to link up with floating around.
It was when you picked him, but you were singing off a different hymn sheet then. In this specific game, with very specific instructions, he would work fine.
For Da Guia? A player most would have down as one of the very best? What is Kohler doing that Da Guia can't? Funny how you said I would talk shit about him before our game, have said I did talk shit about him today, and in fact the only tosser underrating him around here is you.
Both in different settings, yet they bring more balance than Maradona 86 in Argentina 86 with every single other player upgraded and all well suited to their jobs (so long as van Hanegem doesn't go all forward bursting playmaker on us, which is your job as manager).
Anyhow, I'm done with this. It isn't fair on Annah to go through such an extensive consultation round.
That is not true at all. They both marked each other.
"Charlton also revealed that in the 1966 World Cup final he was asked by manager Sir Alf Ramsey to stifle his natural instincts and mark the then-teenage Franz Beckenbauer against West Germany at Wembley."
Afterwords Beckenbauer himself said that Germany lost because Charlton was better than him. "England beat us in 1966 because Bobby Charlton was just a bit better than me."
Last edited:
Lets get this draft done with so that we can kick off the match on Wed 5 Feb noon GMT. Technically, Annah can already make his 2nd pick since a few hrs ago. If no tactics are sent to me by the aforementioned time, I will declare a walkover.
Annah, Charlton did the job he would have done on Beckenbauer, it was Beckenbauer man-marking Charlton that completely took him out of his game. It was a spastic self-inflicted handicap.
In any case, why the hell would you have Charlton man-marking Beckenbauer when he is apparently largely going to be used as a Pelé man-marker?
There you go again, would Beckenbauer do a better job than van Hanegem? Yes, but you lose the rest of his game. There's enough strength in that defence to put a lesser marker on Pelé (which would still make it a hard slog for him) and unleash Beckenbauer so he can contribute going forward. Of course, he will be doing man-marking and playmaking and overall being awesome as it all adds up in drafts. It doesn't in real-life though.
In any case, why the hell would you have Charlton man-marking Beckenbauer when he is apparently largely going to be used as a Pelé man-marker?
There you go again, would Beckenbauer do a better job than van Hanegem? Yes, but you lose the rest of his game. There's enough strength in that defence to put a lesser marker on Pelé (which would still make it a hard slog for him) and unleash Beckenbauer so he can contribute going forward. Of course, he will be doing man-marking and playmaking and overall being awesome as it all adds up in drafts. It doesn't in real-life though.
Unfortunately Annah has no use for either Maradona or Eusebio so showing his hand is in fact detrimental.
When do Balu and I go then? Tomorrow noon?
In the defense for germany Beckenbauer man marked Charlton, Charlton man marked Beckenbauer when England were defending. Charlton was better at man marking Beckenbauer than the opposite.
I am not going to use him unless he plays an offensive role where he will run off the ball! If they pick Maradona and play Beckenbauer a la '66/70 in his box to box role then I will see if I want to use Charlton to man mark Beckenbauer considering he did it successfully. This suits me perfectly as one of my best offensive players will completely shut out Beckenbauer who is an important piece in the puzzle. Also Beckenbauer can't man mark Charlton back as he that would let Pele free.
If he pick Eusebio then I won't man mark Beckenbauer at all as he will be more defensive with Falcao being the offensive one.
Still not sure I want to do it at all like I said, I will see who they pick and who I pick after that.
The top part is exactly what I am talking about in terms of unfair criticism. In the last game how did Eusebio have all this space?
"The name of the game for Eusebio is and always has been dropping deep, receiving in huge, unspoilt, open space between the lines and going on a driving run."
He had Maradona and Zizinho, then to a lesser extent Breitner back there. In addition there was also no number 9 so that responsibility would have fallen on him. Here he has Muller pushing up playing on the shoulder - open space is pretty much exactly what he has. There really is only Zico there, with the odd burst forward from midfield. It isn't a clustered set up for him at all.
I agree with that quote and have already said something very similar to you, so this isn't news. The point is that I think this is achieved in the formation for Eusebio, more so than many others with him in the team.
On Da Guia I am not underrating him, I've never even seen him play. The reason it is a bad idea is because Kohler won the world cup playing that exact position and he compliments the rest of the defence - its nothing against Da Guia, just a plus for Kohler.
Aye sorry for the delay, its obviously between Eusebio/Maradona but Crappy isn't online and I don't want to pick without him.
Well yeah, I figured that out. Why would Charlton man-mark Beckenbauer when England were attacking?
But I'm not just being sarccy, therein actually lies the difference. Beckenbauer man-marked Charlton, full stop, his entire attacking game went out of the window because everything he did was mindful of his Charlton detail, even when Germany had the ball. The same didn't hold for Charlton, which is also where his experience shone through and a reason for him being "a bit better". He didn't go Nobby Stiles on Beckenbauer, just kept a firm eye on him and it was the instruction to Beckenbauer which was far more damaging. It wasn't Charlton stopping him from going on a run like the ones posted above, it was Beckenbauer himself.
WTF. Well this escalated quickly.
I don't agree completely. The reason that Beckenbauer and Charlton performed their man marking duties to such a high level was that they were man marking each other. So whenever England had the ball, Beckenbauer was an inch away from Charlton. But it meant that whenever Germany got the ball Charlton was an inch away from Beckenbauer man marking him.
I don't think Charlton could man mark Beckenbauer out of the game if Beckenbauer wasn't the main man in the defense to keep an eye on Charlton back. Even then I'd not expect as successful of a result as in the '66 final or '70 game. I'd be happy knowing one of my most offensive players is handling Beckenbauer without a doubt in the defense.
"But Charlton says: 'Alf told me in '66 that they had this young man Beckenbauer who could do impulsive things that might be decisive and he needed me to shut him out of the game. I thought "blow me, this is my chance to show myself in a World Cup final", but if he said that this would win the trophy for England, I would do it.
'The odd thing was that Franz had been told to mark me, so we had the strange situation where were rarely more than a couple of yards apart and in a game of such magnitude, neither of us really participated in the World Cup final.'"
It wasn't great, which is why I told Pol ages ago he had got the order wrong and it should have been him going for Muller. When you were lacking a right wing and looking much more a counter setup I could see Eusebio being handy for you, but I still said all along Romario was your man for that purpose and suited both to the 5-3-2 and the 4-2-2-2, Eusebio was more a case of what the restrictions would have landed you with.
You really need to watch more Eusebio, at his awesome best he is basically running from the halfway line all the way to the box, unstoppable, and you won't see a single soul anywhere near him, everyone moved away, much like Cruyff said ("the further away from me you go the better"). Then he either shot from range (40-50%), dribbled or 1-2d his way into the box (30-40%), or assisted the striker (~20%).
Da Guia instead is used to facing several players running at him, not just man-marking one or even having the luxury of a sweeper behind him. He is laughing his arse off at how easy his job would be in a back 5. I understand Kohler won a WC and Da Guia didn't, that's precisely the reason you have a "WC winner" quota problem.
There's no real escalation other than Theon seemingly being really upset I suggest and argue the case for Maradona. Apparently it's bad for you guys that I do that and I should focus on criticising Annah's team.
Go figure.
No problems at all mate, just want to know so I can come back for it. But now I saw Crappy come online.
That isn't it at all and I don't even think you believe that. I have no problem with you arguing for Maradona - I like the team. The problem was your comments on Eusebio which I thought were extremely harsh, the set up is absolutely fine, especially when compared to others formations he has been used in.
That's why I like Eusebio next to Müller so much, they would be awsome together
.Yeah I just remembered that - but that is exactly what I'm talking about. You suggested Eusebio and criticised me for getting Muller instead of him, so you can't believe that bringing him now is a huge error.
There is little wrong with it and I've been concious to create a set up for him to play his all round game - that is what is so annoying about your criticisms. Eusebio does not need to concern himself with leading the line, which gives him the freedom to play as he did for Portugal.
There also isn't the 4-2-2-2 Socrates/Zico partnership clogging up space, its just Zico and there will be complete freedom for him to come deep without getting in people's way. I think it is a great set up for him.
I agree with Theon about Eusebio. But I am still temped by Maradona. Give us 10 mins Annah. Will post the final pick then.