Gio/Theon VS Enigma - NT peak Draft - Final

[Enigma_87]

Brazilian Ronaldo, I forgot to put the link in the first post

http://www.totalfootballforums.com/forums/topic/83025-best-ever-big-game-goalscorers/


Cristiano appears on another list from that link - The most likely to score in any given big game but fenomeno Ronaldo still ranks higher on that one too

Cheers mate, that's one great work.

Eusebio is also very high rated in the following categories being only behind Pele(highlighted the participants in the game as well for reference).

The most likely to score in any given big game

Player Big games Number of individual games scored in Ratio
Pele 31 19 0.61
Eusebio 33 18 0.55
Di Stefano 63 34 0.54
Gerd Muller 63 32 0.51
Ronaldo 97 49 0.49
Leo Messi 41 20 0.49
Michel Platini 57 28 0.49
Rivaldo 59 27 0.46
Ferenc Puskas 37 17 0.46
David Villa 53 24 0.45
Shevchenko 43 19 0.44
Romario 34 14 0.41
Cristiano Ronaldo 86 35 0.41
Denis Law 53 21 0.4
Ronaldinho 86 35 0.41

Most goals per big game

Player Games Goals Ratio
Pele 31 32 1.03
Eusebio 33 27 0.81
Di Stefano 63 49 0.78
Leo Messi 41 31 0.76
Gerd Muller 63 47 0.75
Romario 34 25 0.74
Ronaldo 97 65 0.67
Ferenc Puskas 37 23 0.62
Rivaldo 59 36 0.61
David Villa 53 31 0.59
Michel Platini 57 33 0.58
Shevchenko 43 24 0.55
Denis Law 53 28 0.53
Ian Rush 74 39 0.53
Cristiano Ronaldo 86 42 0.49

 

[Gio]

A final word on Cruyff and Maradona:

• Both played in different eras when attacking players weren't stockpiled in today's manner so no evidence to say they could or couldn't play with other playmakers with ego. When they did, eg Cruyff with Van Hanegem in 1974, it did work well. Most of the legends from back in the day are in the same boat. Teams were built around them and clubs never had the luxury of accommodating 2 or more GOATs.
  
  
• Positionally, they tended to occupy different areas of the park in 1974 and 1986. Cruyff played higher and burst into the channels more often, getting all his assists from out wide, whereas Maradona was more direct through the heart of the defence. They should be able to complement each other. Average heatmaps would probably have Maradona in an inside-right position and Cruyff in a left-sided support-striker position. Our set-up gives them the platform to spring off from those positions to flank and support Ronaldo.
  
  
• In terms of style, Maradona was more bustling, relishing physical contact and carried the ball on many more runs. Cruyff was more about collective play, one-twos and never over-dwelled on the ball when he could zip a pass to a better positioned teammate. He was the "ultimate team player" as Enigma put it. His playmaking in 1974 wasn't typically of the conventional sort from the 10 position, it was mainly done in other pockets of space, with his most devastating contributions coming from the channels and bursting into space on the counter. The more I've watched of his footage in '74, the more I think he can actually be accommodated in a greater range of set-ups than we typically give him credit for. He shone alongside direct dribbling types like Rensenbrink and Keizer as well as playmakers like Van Hanegem. He knew how to shape his game around other player's qualities and still produce incredible football.

 

[Enigma_87]

@Gio no one doubts Cruyff work rate and working for the team mate. I've said it in the past. He'll be buzzing everywhere. But he never played a second fiddle to no one as you put it. He's a huge personality which is a big issue when paired with Maradona.

fortitude also put a great thought on the matter from the same draft:

I think antho made the post earlier about the greatest 10's (let's consider Cruyff a '10') were almost always the dominant personality in terms of dictating their side and its attack - Pele and Messi are actually unique in the sense they were/are comfortable either way, their eclectic natures should be a massive boon for those who have them in a draft such as this and from a personal POV something I would covet whilst attempting to build the most stacked all-star squad I could.

Most times, these 10's were very forceful personalities who abhorred those who sought to share their mantle as the boss of the side. As Brwned & Gio's posts above note. Cruyff was an 'awkward' man; an arsehole to his enemies and a big baby when he did not get his own way, he got away with it (or was perhaps that way) because he was so talented. Maradona is not too disimilar.... same goes for Di Stefano.

I said to a few people when asked about picks to be wary of personalities and egos when combining forces as most of these uber-dominant players were also undisputed rulers of their universe who did not take kindly to anyone stepping on their turf unless they were friends with them.

Whether Maradona and Cruyff as two absolute bosses of their sides would get on is up for debate, as I said to a few others, I think with these kind of players you're going to get one extreme of chaos or another of complete synergy and harmony... but on a surface-level, and considering their legacies and famed volatility, the initial thought is generally that there'll be fireworks and not the good kind.

There's also the issue of these players both expecting to see all of the ball all of the time... are they going to share? Is one going to sit idle or in a laboured position whilst the other goes on a magical run.. how many times are they going to tolerate that before exploding? and so on and so forth.

that I think you also agreed on that posts. Cruyff is one of the most dominant figures on the field, same as Maradona, same as Di Stefano and the likes. If you put him next to great players, but not great playmakers, he'll blend well, but he will take the mantle to run the game, not pass it to someone else.

This is Cruyff. This is the total voetballer - probably the most influential figure football has seen, he was a coach on the pitch and sometimes the coach on the pitch. Would he agree to play an auxiliary role in a team full of great players? I just don't see it.

 

[harms]

Sure, but he didn't. It's not like scoring the goal was the only thing missing from his final performance and he dominated it otherwise, either. It pretty much mirrors Messi's WC2014 Final

Nope, because he won the penalty out of nothing and basically did that goal. It wasn't a hypothetical as in "if he would've scored", more of "if he would've taken the penalty he himself, singlehandedly dribbling through the whole German team, won". With Messi it's more of a "what if Higuain wasn't so shit", which contradicts the reality, not alters it.

 

[Moby]

Nope, because he won the penalty out of nothing and basically did that goal. It wasn't a hypothetical as in "if he would've scored", more of "if he would've taken the penalty he himself, singlehandedly dribbling through the whole German team, won". With Messi it's more of a "what if Higuain wasn't so shit", which contradicts the reality, not alters it.

Do you not think a player who was 'singlehandedly dribbling past an entire team' is basically doing what Maradona did in 1986?

I'm not disagreeing it's fine margins in the end but those fine margins are what separate the good from the great.

And again, the initial argument keeps getting lost. Not sure why you and Gio keep on defending this as if someone is saying that Cruyff doesn't deserve to be in a final of a World Cup / Intl Draft. IT IS IN COMPARISON TO PELÉ AND MARADONA IN THE WORLD CUP.

 

[Gio]

There's no evidence to suggest Cruyff wouldn't strike up a partnership with Maradona. Can you name me all these other great playmakers he wasn't able to work with?

The more I watched of Cruyff in 1974, the more he felt like a natural partner to Ronaldo up front. He buzzes across the front line, is quick and economical with the ball and wreaks havoc. And what you want out of a Maradona partner for the left hand side of the attack is someone who can stretch the play, someone who can keep the ball and give it back, and doesn't feck it up after Maradona has created something out of nothing. Cruyff is all of those things.

If anything, him and Diego could strike up a great partnership. Two legends on the same wavelength.

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

Cruyff was marked out of the game by Vogts in the final.

I don't agree with this really. He blew past Vogts to win the penalty early on, Vogts was fouling a lot and I felt his first half was fairly good. It was only in the second that Vogts starts to get the better and I always felt it was more team oriented than specifically superb man marking.

More Gentile on Zico (Good but not phenomenal) rather than Gentile on Platini or Maradona (phenomenal)

 

[Moby]

More Gentile on Zico

Absolutely, with today's rules Vogts would be left for dead a few times and probably sent off. However, as brought up before, the game isn't being played in 2017.

 

[Enigma_87]

There's no evidence to suggest Cruyff wouldn't strike up a partnership with Maradona. Can you name me all these other great playmakers he wasn't able to work with?

The more I watched of Cruyff in 1974, the more he felt like a natural partner to Ronaldo up front. He buzzes across the front line, is quick and economical with the ball and wreaks havoc. And what you want out of a Maradona partner for the left hand side of the attack is someone who can stretch the play, someone who can keep the ball and give it back, and doesn't feck it up after Maradona has created something out of nothing. Cruyff is all of those things.

If anything, him and Diego could strike up a great partnership. Two legends on the same wavelength.

Well you suggested it yourself mate. You yourself don't see Cruyff working with a dominant playmaker (#10) in Maradona ilk. Of course there is a clash of personalities. We both know Cruyff very well - he wants to be the star man and he will take the mantle and organize the play, that's him and his biggest strengths - not someone who will buzz around, look for space without getting the ball and be ok with all that.

That's Cruyff. We both know how he parted ways with Ajax when things didn't suit him at that point. The great players sometimes have difficult personalities and huge ego's. He will work his bollocks for the team, but he has to be the leader - the alpha dog, he won't be content with peripheral free roaming attacker and restricted to a second fiddle to a team build around Maradona or another star man.

I don't agree with this really. He blew past Vogts to win the penalty early on, Vogts was fouling a lot and I felt his first half was fairly good. It was only in the second that Vogts starts to get the better and I always felt it was more team oriented than specifically superb man marking.

More Gentile on Zico (Good but not phenomenal) rather than Gentile on Platini or Maradona (phenomenal)

Vogts done a pretty good job hounding him on the pitch. The penalty wasn't caused by him so all in all I think he was grand in the final neutralizing Cruyff. Sure he had his moments of brilliance, but he wasn't close to being as effective as Pele in that 1970 final, which I think caused the comparison.

 

[harms]

Do you not think a player who was 'singlehandedly dribbling past an entire team' is basically doing what Maradona did in 1986?

I'm not disagreeing it's fine margins in the end but those fine margins are what separate the good from the great.

And again, the initial argument keeps getting lost. Not sure why you and Gio keep on defending this as if someone is saying that Cruyff doesn't deserve to be in a final of a World Cup / Intl Draft. IT IS IN COMPARISON TO PELÉ AND MARADONA IN THE WORLD CUP.

I'm not arguing the comparability of Cruyff and Maradona for Gio, I'm not fully sold on that. The fact is, Cruyff's final performance is getting ridiculously underrated - I'd say that it's closer to Maradona's 1986, in which he "only" contributed to one goal, being man-marked for the whole game - while him being man-marked opened so many channels for his teammates. Cruyff didn't disappear, his comrades did - they though that they had won it after they scored the first one with Sepp Maier being the first German player to touch the ball, and after Breitner's equalizer they completely lost it.

edit: have to add though to avoid confusion - Maradona's is clearly better; yet the pattern is similar, but because of the final outcome one gets praised and the other gets called a bottler

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

It's not undue, it's the most important game of these players' careers. World Cup is the biggest stage, and the final is what matters a lot more than the games before.

This is a really tricky question for this draft. I mean since this is the final and we are heavily weighing some legendary final performances like Maradona and Pele then by that logic it really hurts Ronaldo with his mysterious 98 final flop and Figueroa who didn't even make it past the group stage and getting judged on just one match really. I don't really have an answer for this and I guess every voter just has to weigh it personally.

 

[Moby]

Maradona's is clearly better

Good. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Pat_Mustard]

But you're placing undue weight on the final. Zidane played much better in the 1998 final than the 2000 final but we always went for the 2000 set of performances. After all, it's not the Tournament Final Draft, it's the Tournament draft.

As I said above, Cruyff wins a penalty in the first minute after a 50-yard run through the heart of the West German team. Then later in the half breaks clear and tees up Rep for an easy finish - which he squanders. It's not as if he had a shite game and couldn't influence matters - he basically gives Holland 2 goals in the final! Even though that wasn't Cruyff's best game of his campaign, it's hard to think of many greats who have had more influence on a final. How many 50-yard runs have there been with the ball in a World Cup final to win a penalty?

The narratives we retrospectively develop about certain tournaments and players are often a little distant from what happened.

Aye, I've watched that match lately and Cruyff didn't really vanish after winning the penalty as per the popular narrative. Rep should have done much better when Cruyff played him in one vs one with Maier, he nearly set up another with a great free kick whipped low across the six yard box near the start of the second half, and in general he seen more of the ball than I would have expected. Not to downplay the efforts of Vogts, however, who was superb and mostly stayed on the right side of outright cynicism in his defensive work. Ol' Berti was good on the ball as well, bursting forward through the middle and coming close to scoring in the first half.

Its only fair to mention Muller as well. So fecking clinical .

 

[Gio]

We talked earlier about match-winners given the closeness of the overall match-up and similar set-ups on show. Where I think there is a decisive difference is in the box-to-box contest between Lothar Matthaus and Didi. For all of Didi's creativity in 1958, I don't see him being as influential against the greatest central midfielder of all time whose defensive credentials are impeccable. Especially when Didi isn't going to have the same freedom to attack when Maradona is floating around for the kill.

But it's when Matthaus is surging forward that we have a real chance of deciding matters. He will leave Didi for dead. He scored 4 goals from central midfield in 1990 - 3 of them from outside the box no less. He has every chance of replicating that here given the relative lack of resistance facing him, particularly with the opposition preoccupied with Maradona.

 

[harms]

Aye, I've watched that match lately and Cruyff didn't really vanish after winning the penalty as per the popular narrative. Rep should have done much better when Cruyff played him in one vs one with Maier, he nearly set up another with a great free kick whipped low across the six yard box near the start of the second half, and in general he seen more of the ball than I would have expected. Not to downplay the efforts of Vogts, however, who was superb and mostly stayed on the right side of outright cynicism in his defensive work. Ol' Berti was good on the ball as well, bursting forward through the middle and coming close to scoring in the first half.

Its only fair to mention Muller as well. So fecking clinical .

Taking the words out of German fans mouths: "We know Bonhof, who is Cruyff?". The real star behind all that Mullers, Cruyffs and Keisers

 

[Moby]

This is a really tricky question for this draft. I mean since this is the final and we are heavily weighing some legendary final performances like Maradona and Pele then by that logic it really hurts Ronaldo with his mysterious 98 final flop and Figueroa who didn't even make it past the group stage and getting judged on just one match really. I don't really have an answer for this and I guess every voter just has to weigh it personally.

It was discussed extensively previously here:

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/gio-theon-vs-moby-nt-peak-draft.428461/page-2

 

[Enigma_87]

I'm not arguing the comparability of Cruyff and Maradona for Gio, I'm not fully sold on that. The fact is, Cruyff's final performance is getting ridiculously underrated - I'd say that it's closer to Maradona's 1986, in which he "only" contributed to one goal, being man-marked for the whole game - while him being man-marked opened so many channels for his teammates. Cruyff didn't disappear, his comrades did - they though that they had won it after they scored the first one with Sepp Maier being the first German player to touch the ball, and after Breitner's equalizer they completely lost it.

edit: have to add though to avoid confusion - Maradona's is clearly better; yet the pattern is similar, but because of the final outcome one gets praised and the other gets called a bottler

I wouldn't call Cruyff a bottle job for the final, just to avoid confusion myself. Think Vogts has done brilliantly in that final to nullify him in the best way possible and think he has done a grand job, but I think all things considered Pele had a better world cup and starred in every game including the final with his impact never being reduced in a great way.

Also Pele came with great authority and stature(not that Cruyff didn't mind) and was considered as the greatest of all time at the time so he was kicked down, pulled, tackled form behind even defenders used bodychecks to put him on the ground yet he had a wonderful WC.

 

[Moby]

The real star behind all that Mullers, Cruyffs and Keisers

Now you are reaching antohan levels of hipsterism.

 

[harms]

Now you are reaching antohan levels of hipsterism.

I really like Bonhof, actually it's a shame that he wasn't picked in this draft, had brilliant Euros too. He wasn't, right?

 

[Moby]

I really like Bonhof, actually it's a shame that he wasn't picked in this draft, had brilliant Euros too. He wasn't, right?

Don't think so, no.

He somehow always tends to get ridiculously underrated or ridiculously overrated. Strange case.

 

[Enigma_87]

I really like Bonhof, actually it's a shame that he wasn't picked in this draft, had brilliant Euros too. He wasn't, right?

Thought about picking him as 12th or 13th man but went with Ayala at the end, would've used the EURO incarnation mind as I thought he was better there.

Was surprised that Di Stefano wasn't picked considering his Copa America in 1947.

 

[harms]

Okay, I finally made up my mind. Two incredibly strong teams, but taking out of the equation those ridiculous front threes (Gio having a marginal individual advantage, Enigma's trio dovetailing better, Müller equalling at least one goal in any circumstances etc.), which are about equal, I'll go with 3:2.

Firstly - Schmeichel; One of the most amazing goalkeeper performances at the international stage, alongside Kahn and Buffon. Fillol is fantastic, but Pete is in a tier of his own - and having him in goal is one of a very few definite advantages I see on the pitch.

Secondly - Enigma's defence, both personnel and formation. I love Figueroa to bits, in fact I'm pretty sure that it's my compilation being used in the OP (can't see dailymotion without a VPN on, sadly), but in the all-time tournament performance draft final he comes a little light. It has nothing to do with his quality as a player or even the quality of his performance, but you have to have a more prolonged tenure to be used in the final. And Moore, being the less libero-esque out of the big 5, isn't going to provide cover for the midfield in a way Baresi or Scirea would've. Small things, but all count as well.

Thirdly - outside the big guns, I always look for the wild cards. Gio/Theon have Matthäus in his 1990 form and Sammer in 1996 - and the wildcards don't get better than that. On the other side we have more conservative 1970 Beckenbauer, who is also restricted tactically, being played next to Didi without a pushing libero.

3:2
R. Carlos, Ronaldo, Sammer : Müller (2)

 

[Enigma_87]

Okay, I finally made up my mind. Two incredibly strong teams, but taking out of the equation those ridiculous front threes (Gio having a marginal individual advantage, Enigma's trio dovetailing better, Müller equalling at least one goal in any circumstances etc.), which are about equal, I'll go with 3:2.

Firstly - Schmeichel; One of the most amazing goalkeeper performances at the international stage, alongside Kahn and Buffon. Fillol is fantastic, but Pete is in a tier of his own - and having him in goal is one of a very few definite advantages I see on the pitch.

Secondly - Enigma's defence, both personnel and formation. I love Figueroa to bits, in fact I'm pretty sure that it's my compilation being used in the OP (can't see dailymotion without a VPN on, sadly), but in the all-time tournament performance draft final he comes a little light. It has nothing to do with his quality as a player or even the quality of his performance, but you have to have a more prolonged tenure to be used in the final. And Moore, being the less libero-esque out of the big 5, isn't going to provide cover for the midfield in a way Baresi or Scirea would've. Small things, but all count as well.

Thirdly - outside the big guns, I always look for the wild cards. Gio/Theon have Matthäus in his 1990 form and Sammer in 1996 - and the wildcards don't get better than that. On the other side we have more conservative 1970 Beckenbauer, who is also restricted tactically, being played next to Didi without a pushing libero.

3:2
R. Carlos, Ronaldo, Sammer : Müller (2)

I always respect your opinion mate so in this case as well. But I think Zanetti is getting a bit of a free ride here whether he deserves to be in this final. Compared to Amoros who had a great WC and comes with those credentials as an attacking right back at his peak and having a great WC - he has done it at a much higher level than Zanetti did in that Copa.

I'd love to hear your opinion on that as well as otherwise players like Di Stefano should've featured in the final as well IMO, but weren't even picked.

 

[Tuppet]

Are subs allowed ? Someone like Dzajic (or someone else don't know all G/T's subs) for Cruyff would probably make the team function better. Giving reigns to Maradona with G/T's superior midfield could turn the game around.

 

[Joga Bonito]

There's no evidence to suggest Cruyff wouldn't strike up a partnership with Maradona. Can you name me all these other great playmakers he wasn't able to work with?

The more I watched of Cruyff in 1974, the more he felt like a natural partner to Ronaldo up front. He buzzes across the front line, is quick and economical with the ball and wreaks havoc. And what you want out of a Maradona partner for the left hand side of the attack is someone who can stretch the play, someone who can keep the ball and give it back, and doesn't feck it up after Maradona has created something out of nothing. Cruyff is all of those things.

If anything, him and Diego could strike up a great partnership. Two legends on the same wavelength.

That video isn't a fair appraisal of Cruyff's playing style as it only contains his 'highlights' and doesn't exactly exhibit how dominant he was for his side and what a magnificent playmaker he was.

And going by all this 'inside-left', 'stretching play', give and go etc (not just from you, tbf), I'm not sure if we are talking about Johan freaking Cruyff or a wing-forward like Stoichkov.

because Maradona operates more inside right and Cruyff inside left, both can do damage on the wings and generally more versatile players in terms of positions

Cruyff was more about utilization of space rather than running around with the ball. Given a free role in a 5-3-2 he'll have plenty of space to operate in and contribute to on and off the ball. I can't think of a better AM/Forward to share the field with Maradona.

Don't get me wrong, Cruyff was capable of doing those things above and he was one of the most dynamic greats out there, which was precisely what made him unique in relative to other greats. In the sense that it was the icing on the cake, rather than the cake itself. Reading these views makes me wonder if Cruyff is underrated or misrepresented.


I'd implore everyone to watch these videos at the very least and count how many times Cruyff makes those 'off the ball runs', 'stretches play down the left' or basically play as the roaming forward, as opposed to being the prime mover of the ball, dropping deep and playing those one-twos (as the dominant party). Basically, would you qualify him as a dominant playmaker who is dictating the course of the play for his side, or more of a forward who would form a great duo of sorts with Ronaldo here with Maradona pulling the strings. Of course, as I mentioned above it's not as black and white given Cruyff's unique playing style but which would he tend towards more?









Rant over. Heck, I wouldn't even have bothered if Maradona was painted as more of a dribbling stretching forward here, but Cruyff

 

[Enigma_87]

Are subs allowed ? Someone like Dzajic (or someone else don't know all G/T's subs) for Cruyff would probably make the team function better. Giving reigns to Maradona with G/T's superior midfield could turn the game around.

Yeah they can bring Dzajic on, who will bring them no doubt much better balance, but I can see why they've went with Cruyff as they'll be losing a lot of oomph up front. It's very tight game at the moment, so I can see why they are going with names there rather than balance.

 

[Gio]

That video isn't a fair appraisal of Cruyff's playing style as it only contains his 'highlights' and doesn't exactly exhibit how dominant he was for his side and what a magnificent playmaker he was.

Exactly, it's a highlight video of where he was most influential. Yes he liked to drop into midfield from time to time to get on the ball and fizz it on, but it was hardly decisive to Holland's game. Him doing that didn't really hurt the opposition and it's not something we necessarily need from him here. All the great 10s did that, especially in the '50s-70s when the game was slower and they could drop into midfield, stroke their beards unpressed and move the ball on. But it's not something I think replicates to a more modern set-up very well.

What mattered was the overall movement and interchanging of positions - which teams couldn't live with - and what Cruyff delivered (with his teammates) in the final third - as per the highlights video. The principles from that Holland team I'd happily take here would be the fluidity and movement in attack with that front three. And what I want from Cruyff is making that difference he so regularly made in the final third in '74.

 

[Joga Bonito]

es he liked to drop into midfield from time to time to get on the ball and fizz it on, but it was hardly decisive to Holland's game.

It definitely was and as the 'false 9'/playmaker of his side, it was a crucial facet of his game, and not as inconsequent or indecisive as you make it out to be. Him 'dropping deep into midfield from time to time to get on the ball and fizz it on' was one of the major reasons why he was such as ubiquitous and unpredictable presence who was capable of building up play, orchestrating things from the middle, and of course a major driving factor behind the Ajax's/Holland side's fluidity.

What mattered was the overall movement and interchanging of positions - which teams couldn't live with - and what Cruyff delivered (with his teammates) in the final third - as per the highlights video.

And Holland's/Ajax's interchanging of positions wasn't just transversal or limited to a particular area (the final third) but more often than not longitudinal, and no one had more freedom than Cruyff with regards to his movement or playmaking responsibility on the ball.

The principles from that Holland team I'd happily take here would be the fluidity and movement in attack with that front three. And what I want from Cruyff is making that difference he so regularly made in the final third in '74.

I'd wager Rummneggie or Elkjaer or a whole raft of other forwards would fulfill that job that you'd want from that player between Ronaldo and Maradona than Cruyff. Reducing Cruyff to 'just' a final third threat isn't the optimal use of him, nor do I ever see Cruyff willingly restrict himself to a forward role (unless it's the late sixties version that we are talking about that is). Completely goes against his playing style and his total-footballing approach to the game.

 

[Moby]

I'd wager Rummneggie or Elkjaer or a whole raft of other forwards would fulfill that job that you'd want from that player between Ronaldo and Maradona than Cruyff. Reducing Cruyff to 'just' a final third threat isn't the optimal use of him, nor do I ever see Cruyff willingly restrict himself to a forward role (unless it's the late sixties version that we are talking about that is). Completely goes against his playing style and his total-footballing approach to the game.

Absolutely this.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Basically, would you qualify him as a dominant playmaker who is dictating the course of the play for his side, or more of a forward who would form a great duo of sorts with Ronaldo here with Maradona pulling the strings. Of course, as I mentioned above it's not as black and white given Cruyff's unique playing style but which would he tend towards more?

The former, obviously.

Don't see him dovetailing nicely with Maradona. In a fantasy match with zero limitations, no particular premises, etc. - possibly.

Based on how they functioned in the tournaments they're picked for here - no.

You always have to cut the managers some slack when GOATs are involved - it's fantasy, you have to imagine pretty much every player on the park being a bit more subdued/less dominant than they were historically. But here we have a clear premise. Can't ignore what the players actually did in '74, '86, etc.

 

[Enigma_87]

The former, obviously.

Don't see him dovetailing nicely with Maradona. In a fantasy match with zero limitations, no particular premises, etc. - possibly.

Based on how they functioned in the tournaments they're picked for here - no.

You always have to cut the managers some slack when GOATs are involved - it's fantasy, you have to imagine pretty much every player on the park being a bit more subdued/less dominant than they were historically. But here we have a clear premise. Can't ignore what the players actually did in '74, '86, etc.

Of course this is my main issue as well. Cruyff wasn't just a regular attacker in the Dutch side or just the best player. The team was build around him. It was players like van Hanegem who had to adapt their game and have supportive roles than the other way around.

What epitomizes Cruyff, Garrincha, Maradona performance in the respective world cup was their individual brilliance and how there was a clear game plan in the team game - you get the ball to them, or just let them come and take it off the defence and do their thing. It's not a question whether or not they can fit in peripheral roles - obviously they can as they are great players, but that doesn't highlight their performance - quite the opposite.

Stretching the play and running into channels - that's not peak Cruyff we all know and especially in that WC. Based on career path and if he can fulfill that role is another matter, but I still won't use prime Cruyff playing off Maradona - they aren't the best fit, quite the contrary could create more issues on the pitch.

In a tight game with GOAT players everywhere a question like that whether 2 of the best players in Gio's team would fit is pretty important considering the level in the other team.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Interesting. What do you think of di Stefano and Maradona for instance? And is there a player/type of player whom you can't see combining well with Cruyff?

Nah, I wouldn't buy AdS and Maradona as optimal. Not even Pele. Not many other than AMs other than Cruyff. I think Maradona will benefit from having Cruyff running around dragging defenders out of position and opening up spaces for him to exploit. Despite being left footed, Maradona tended to slightly prefer the Inside Right channel to make his runs as you can see in the Finals replay including the HoG goal. I don't see Cruyff overlapping here at all.

But then again, it only works because of a 5-3-2 affords enough space for the front 3 to operate. Had it been a 4-2-3-1, I wouldn't have bought that as optimal.

The argument on temperament, on who is the king of the roost or has the bigger ego is always there, but that is something that we should not consider in a draft.

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

Thirdly - outside the big guns, I always look for the wild cards. Gio/Theon have Matthäus in his 1990 form and Sammer in 1996 - and the wildcards don't get better than that. On the other side we have more conservative 1970 Beckenbauer, who is also restricted tactically, being played next to Didi without a pushing libero.

I feel this shortchanges Didi a bit. In '58 he was as dominant and important as any CM playmaker has been in an international tournament. His range of passing and decision making was just phenomenal utilizing just about every other Brazilian on the pitch and controlling the tempo. I loved the way Didi calmly took the ball from the net and slowly walked it to back to center after Swedens went up 1-0 in the final. With this 532 vs 532 match where the flanks are mostly just 1v1 battles with Bobby vs Amoros and Zanetti vs Facchetti I could actually see Didi being Enigma's MotM where the wingbacks and front trio are complementary players like Pele, Eusebio and Muller who all would get the most benefit from Didi's skillset. This team seems built around maximizing Didi more than anything else. I definitely see him as being just as powerful if not more so as an xfactor or simply primary influence than Sammer and Matthäus

 

[Ecstatic]

Cruyff and Sammer tilt this in favour of Gio.

Whatever the team or positioning, you will always vote for Cruyff

 

[Moby]

The argument on temperament, on who is the king of the roost or has the bigger ego is always there, but that is something that we should not consider in a draft.

Well, the reason it is being talked about is because it translated into their game, not because they would not get along in the dressing room or anything.

Maradona's entire career is a pretty good support case for this - his best came when he was the out and out alpha male in the team, no one else was anywhere near remotely. Both Argentina 86 and Napoli stints suggest that, anything else is conjecture. It's discussed quite a lot on why he's not an ideal candidate on building a GOAT filled line up as opposed to other GOATs like Pelé and Messi.

 

[Enigma_87]

I feel this shortchanges Didi a bit. In '58 he was as dominant and important as any CM playmaker has been in an international tournament. His range of passing and decision making was just phenomenal utilizing just about every other Brazilian on the pitch and controlling the tempo. I loved the way Didi calmly took the ball from the net and slowly walked it to back to center after Swedens went up 1-0 in the final. With this 532 vs 532 match where the flanks are mostly just 1v1 battles with Bobby vs Amoros and Zanetti vs Facchetti I could actually see Didi being Enigma's MotM where the wingbacks and front trio are complementary players like Pele, Eusebio and Muller who all would get the most benefit from Didi's skillset. This team seems built around maximizing Didi more than anything else. I definitely see him as being just as powerful if not more so as an xfactor or simply primary influence than Sammer and Matthäus

Cheers mate. I've put a lot of stress on Didi's performance in the opening games of the draft for the very same reason. Didi tends to get overlooked when discussing some of the greatest playmakers in the game probably because of being oldie but he absolutely bossed the tournament packed with great players all round.



Third goal against Austria where he passed it to Altafini. The nudge to Pele against Wales, the two in the SF against France. The video here is cut off for the first goal, but will try to look up other sources for the other 2.


Edit:


First goal against USSR - pass to Vava to set him free.

Some highlights of him unlocking the defences in those games. It's not only his stature as a player but his performance is right up there with Matthaus and Xavi as the greatest performances by a CM in an international tournament.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

The argument on temperament, on who is the king of the roost or has the bigger ego is always there, but that is something that we should not consider in a draft.

I think we should, actually.

It's very difficult to factor it in sometimes, granted, but I see no reason why it shouldn't be a factor among other factors if relevant details about the players in question are known.

 

[Joga Bonito]

I think Maradona will benefit from having Cruyff running around dragging defenders out of position and opening up spaces for him to exploit.

Not this again... I'd refer you to the post that I made above on this issue.

The argument on temperament, on who is the king of the roost or has the bigger ego is always there, but that is something that we should not consider in a draft.

Except of course the temperament clash (which is pretty significant nonetheless), is only part of the discussion here and not the whole debate itself.

Mind you there are occasions when we should make an exception, such as Maradona or Redondo in the same side as Passarella or say van Hanegem playing alongside Germans but I see no reason why we should ignore the ego/temperament of either or both Maradona and Cruyff here, given how it was a pretty critical component of the players (legendary figures) that they were.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Well, the reason it is being talked about is because it translated into their game, not because they would not get along in the dressing room or anything.

Maradona's entire career is a pretty good support case for this - his best came when he was the out and out alpha male in the team, no one else was anywhere near remotely. Both Argentina 86 and Napoli stints suggest that, anything else is conjecture. It's discussed quite a lot on why he's not an ideal candidate on building a GOAT filled line up as opposed to other GOATs like Pelé and Messi.

We have so many instances where we take a break from reality. Would playing Stiles/Gentile result in a red card in a Draft? Pre vs post offside rules, archaic vs modern formations etc. We've even a seen game with Keane and Vieira in the middle. Playing style is one thing, but temperamental suitability is too far a stretch to be counted as a factor in drafts.

 

[Gio]

It definitely was and as the 'false 9'/playmaker of his side, it was a crucial facet of his game, and not as inconsequent or indecisive as you make it out to be. Him 'dropping deep into midfield from time to time to get on the ball and fizz it on' was one of the major reasons why he was such as ubiquitous and unpredictable presence who was capable of building up play, orchestrating things from the middle, and of course a major driving factor behind the Ajax's/Holland side's fluidity.



And Holland's/Ajax's interchanging of positions wasn't just transversal or limited to a particular area (the final third) but more often than not longitudinal, and no one had more freedom than Cruyff with regards to his movement or playmaking responsibility on the ball.

I agree with that. And I initially had the same concerns, but having analysed that Dutch team and watched more of Cruyff I felt he could dovetail off a central or slightly right-sided 10 (in Diego's case).

Where we differ is that where Cruyff really hurt teams was up against the opposition defenders. The highlights of Holland's performances are really clear on that. And I don't necessarily see an issue with Cruyff dropping from his default position to get on the ball. Any space he vacates is freed up for Maradona, Ronaldo, Matthaus or even Carlos.