LV Monopoly Draft - Finals: Skizzanomoss vs Jayvin

With players at peak, who will win the match?


  • Total voters
    35
  • Poll closed .
Agreed to some extend, but do you see Pele and Maradona being ideal?
I see nothing wrong with Maradona and Pelé in that formation. I think they would work excellently together, particularly as Netto won't really be going forward that much therefore allowing Maradona to drift out wide and occupy the left channels. Pelé, as a result, would work very well off of him, dropping into the spaces in the middle, linking up with Maradona on the left, etc. Plus, Pelé's one of those players who I believe can work with anyone if put into his free forward role. He worked excellently with Coutinho (#9), Vavá (all-rounded forward), and Tostão (#10 playing as a false 9) as well as more inside left players like Rivelino and Zagallo.
But Lahm doesn't lack stamina or an engine or whatever anyway. He regularly ran the biggest distance in his teams both for club and country while also playing the most minutes throughout a season. You won't find any games where he was getting tired towards the end either, it's actually the opposite with him often getting involved in crucial attacking moves towards the end when most players were already tired.
Exactly. I remember Lahm scoring the winner against a tired Turkey side in the Euro 2008 semis, and he looked fresh even though he was tested throughout the match by the opposing right winger. There's really nothing wrong with him in that right wing back role, honestly, as he was always excellent going forward. One doesn't need to be particularly pacy in order to play there, just have a very good delivery and decent dribbling. Lahm may not be that good of a dribbler, but he more than makes up for it with this on-the-ball intelligence, passing, and deliveries into the box.

For the good setup that Skizzahnomoss has, Jayvin's defence is very solid, and Davids-Keane will allow them to cover lots of ground in the midfield even if they can be prone to getting dragged around by Dunc, Neeskens, and Maradona, and Pelé dovetailing off of each other. For me, Thuram on the right will make things very difficult for Maradona, but if they had a more natural left-sided wide player than Netto to support Maradona, I think they'd have an excellent chance to win.
 
I see nothing wrong with Maradona and Pelé in that formation. I think they would work excellently together, particularly as Netto won't really be going forward that much therefore allowing Maradona to drift out wide and occupy the left channels. Pelé, as a result, would work very well off of him, dropping into the spaces in the middle, linking up with Maradona on the left, etc. Plus, Pelé's one of those players who I believe can work with anyone if put into his free forward role. He worked excellently with Coutinho (#9), Vavá (all-rounded forward), and Tostão (#10 playing as a false 9) as well as more inside left players like Rivelino and Zagallo.

I agree with you.

Brazil 1958

d4996e95-111b-3b82-8de4-6b6dc6fe8fc2.jpg
 
I agree with you.

Brazil 1958

d4996e95-111b-3b82-8de4-6b6dc6fe8fc2.jpg
It's nothing like it tho. Didi is deeper, unlike Maradona occupying #10, Zagallo is great left option both on width and balance, Vava is similar to Suarez, and you have Garrincha as an outside right. Where do you fit Maradona in this?

Especially in a narrower side with two holding midfielders and wing backs that naturally tend to move in.
I see nothing wrong with Maradona and Pelé in that formation. I think they would work excellently together, particularly as Netto won't really be going forward that much therefore allowing Maradona to drift out wide and occupy the left channels. Pelé, as a result, would work very well off of him, dropping into the spaces in the middle, linking up with Maradona on the left, etc. Plus, Pelé's one of those players who I believe can work with anyone if put into his free forward role. He worked excellently with Coutinho (#9), Vavá (all-rounded forward), and Tostão (#10 playing as a false 9) as well as more inside left players like Rivelino and Zagallo.

That space in the middle is well saturated tho. The only side that resembles the one here is the 1970 side and you have Pele in exactly the same position Maradona is supposed to be here.
 
I agree with you.

Brazil 1958

d4996e95-111b-3b82-8de4-6b6dc6fe8fc2.jpg
Not sure what this lineup is mean to represent. It shows Pele in Maradona's favoured position, not to mention the talent of the wide players not even being close to what Skizzo/Annah can actuallly field.
 
Wow a lot of posts here when I was napping.

Maradona in particular provided a lot of threat from wide areas as well and was equally capable to beat someone from out wide as from the centre of the pitch. He's not a GOAT quality width either, but we do have both him and Pele who are great individuals who be a threat no matter where they receive the ball.


Interestingly I find your criticism of my first round match team with Maradona actually applies to your team here. I definitely feel your team and especially tactic formation has less width and more congestion in the center than my first round formation.

On the other hand I am not a big fan of having three ball carrying players in those central areas in Maradona... I think one of them would be enough and they don't complement each other much. Suarez definitely would however but then there is also the issue that Zizinho as the sole width on the right just doesn't seem right to me. He had the abilities to fill that role fairly well but he'd definitely enjoy a winger, or at least an offensive full back on the outside of him to be at his very best.

Well you have the three ball carrying players in central areas here in your formation! XD
 
Last edited:
Wow a lot of posts here when I was napping.




Interestingly I find your criticism of my first round match team with Maradona actually applies to your team here.



Well you have the three ball carrying players in central areas here in your formation XD

And you are trying to rely on even more unnatural ideas to provide width than I was.

Definitely so to a big extent albeit you had three players of the same mold in Ronaldo, Maradona and Zizinho and Gentile and Kroos are more static than dynamic runners like Neeskens and Edwards. I did give a lot of credit to Breitner as well though even if he wouldn't run the flank, but rather make intelligent runs where they were needed. We only have Pele and Maradona as ball carrying players in our team though, not sure who you consider the third to be?

We are also not trying to claim we have width - Lahm on the right and that's it, if anything I've been saying we don't but Napoli didn't and they made it work anyhow.
 
Definitely so to a big extent albeit you had three players of the same mold in Ronaldo, Maradona and Zizinho and Gentile and Kroos are more static than dynamic runners like Neeskens and Edwards. I did give a lot of credit to Breitner as well though even if he wouldn't run the flank, but rather make intelligent runs where they were needed. We only have Pele and Maradona as ball carrying players in our team though, not sure who you consider the third to be?

We are also not trying to claim we have width - Lahm on the right and that's it, if anything I've been saying we don't but Napoli didn't and they made it work anyhow.

You don't have the same types of players as Napoli did and aren't running the same tactics/formation as Napoli. That formation relied on Careca and Carnevale/Bruno peeling off to the flanks constantly which you don't have here. I tried to highlight this last draft actually with Careca constantly vacating that central space for Maradona (Zico in my draft) to move into.

I don't really see your side as similar at all. this is a better representation of that Napoli side:

napoli-1989.jpg


Also I have to read some more posts but no idea why in the world @Downcast is linking Brasil 1958 formation when that is not in play here at all either.
 
You don't have the same types of players as Napoli did and aren't running the same tactics/formation as Napoli. That formation relied on Careca and Carnevale/Bruno peeling off to the flanks constantly which you don't have here. I tried to highlight this last draft actually with Careca constantly vacating that central space for Maradona (Zico in my draft) to move into.

I don't really see your side as similar at all. this is a better representation of that Napoli side:

napoli-1989.jpg

The only player type we are missing is the Carnavale where we have Pele instead. Suarez will do a great Careca in making dummy runs behind the defense and out wide to create space for Maradona and Pele, Beckenbauer will do a great Romano, with Neskens and Edwards as brutal upgrades in every way shape and form to the midfield duo they sported. Francini and Ferrara didn't provide width while we have Lahm doing so on the right in a more potent way than Ferrara could and Francini liked making unorthodox runs towards goal frequently a la Netto.

Better comparison would be that Lahm is light years better at providing width than Francini, and Netto would add a lot more with his forward runs than Ferrara. So while we do lack Carnevale, we have added Lahm, Neeskens, Pele and Netto in terms of players who can provide more width than their counter parts.

It is odd as the critique regarding Netto should be his defensive side, not what he'd do offensively which would be impressive and add a lot to the game.

"He started out playing on the left of defense but, due to his offensive mentality, dribbling and technical abilities turned into a dynamic central midfielder. His versatility and footballing intelligence allowed him to play a number of positions across defense and midfield."

It doesn't sound like he'd struggle as a left wing back because of lacking in abilities to impact the game offensively.
 
I'd say Suarez will provide some width on the right so that flank is little less problematic as I see it, although I'd prefer a more attacking minded full back, but still Suarez dropping and Lahm is much better on the right than Netto on the left
 
You want more than that from your wingback?
I think his point was that a back 5 indicates less options upfront for him to assist than in a back 4 so his output wouldn't be as impressive.
 
I'll leave this thread now for good or my head is going to explode :lol:.
 
I see nothing wrong with Maradona and Pelé in that formation. I think they would work excellently together, particularly as Netto won't really be going forward that much therefore allowing Maradona to drift out wide and occupy the left channels. Pelé, as a result, would work very well off of him, dropping into the spaces in the middle, linking up with Maradona on the left, etc. Plus, Pelé's one of those players who I believe can work with anyone if put into his free forward role. He worked excellently with Coutinho (#9), Vavá (all-rounded forward), and Tostão (#10 playing as a false 9) as well as more inside left players like Rivelino and Zagallo.

Exactly. I remember Lahm scoring the winner against a tired Turkey side in the Euro 2008 semis, and he looked fresh even though he was tested throughout the match by the opposing right winger. There's really nothing wrong with him in that right wing back role, honestly, as he was always excellent going forward. One doesn't need to be particularly pacy in order to play there, just have a very good delivery and decent dribbling. Lahm may not be that good of a dribbler, but he more than makes up for it with this on-the-ball intelligence, passing, and deliveries into the box.

For the good setup that Skizzahnomoss has, Jayvin's defence is very solid, and Davids-Keane will allow them to cover lots of ground in the midfield even if they can be prone to getting dragged around by Dunc, Neeskens, and Maradona, and Pelé dovetailing off of each other. For me, Thuram on the right will make things very difficult for Maradona, but if they had a more natural left-sided wide player than Netto to support Maradona, I think they'd have an excellent chance to win.
You mean a player like Ryan Giggs?
 
I see Platini fitting very nicely here. Not fully convinced about the collaboration in that attack - three individuals in many ways albeit there's a nice blend of threats in there. Platini becomes fundamental in joining it all together.
 
GK is a bit of a piss take in an all-time final, even in a light hearted draft such as this.

ETA Or, rather, I should say that he's too much of a piss take in said context. If you're looking for a deciding factor in an otherwise tight enough affair, he sticks out plenty.
 
Last edited:
You mean a player like Ryan Giggs?

I really think Skizzannah would have been better off sticking to their German back-4 plan that looked really good for most of the draft (although they didn't pick Breitner :(

I see Platini fitting very nicely here. Not fully convinced about the collaboration in that attack - three individuals in many ways albeit there's a nice blend of threats in there. Platini becomes fundamental in joining it all together.

Henry was very much a team player in his peak years for Arsenal. He doesn't hold the PL all-time season assist record for nothing ya know ;)
 
Was that while trying to wrap your head around fullbacks being more productive than wingbacks?
No, that depends on so many different things and if wingbacks are played in a more defensive set-up, they'll obviously should be expected to reach lower numbers than attacking fullbacks in dominant attacking teams.

The notion that Edgar in your opinion actually didn't mean the numbers should improve even though he wrote exactly that and again confirmed he meant exactly that after I asked him about it is too much for me to handle.
 
Henry was very much a team player in his peak years for Arsenal. He doesn't hold the PL all-time season assist record for nothing ya know ;)
Sure - he'll cause carnage finding space in the inside-left channel into the box which Romario will lap up. I suppose Romario does need that selflessness from his strike partners and I'm not completely sold that he'd always get it from those two. Still a hell of an attack though.
 
I think his point was that a back 5 indicates less options upfront for him to assist than in a back 4 so his output wouldn't be as impressive.
Indeed. I alluded to the same. For a reference to Lahm I'd say he isn't far off from someone like Dennis Irwin in terms of playing style - intelligent, positional discipline, great engine, metronomic ability on the ball, and excellent going forward with a winger to overlap with. Yet I wouldn't say either are absolutely ideal as a wingback being sole provider of width, but that's only when you are looking for perfection rather than functionality, as both would be far from being problematic either. Irwin for example could make telling differences going forward and in that semi final against Juventus he hit the post twice and could have won the game at that point for us. Anyway, people bringing up someone like Cafu are doing it because of all the top RBs he has huge credentials while playing as a wingback in a 5 man backline and won a WC doing that, similarly for Zanetti who played in 5 man backlines for a tremendous amount of his career and is well versed with that role. Another name I'd include is Dani Alves, who was again for large periods the sole provider of width on his side and did it very well. And again these are all marginal criticisms, nothing more.
 
No, that depends on so many different things and if wingbacks are played in a more defensive set-up, they'll obviously should be expected to reach lower numbers than attacking fullbacks in dominant attacking teams.

The notion that Edgar in your opinion actually didn't mean the numbers should improve even though he wrote exactly that and again confirmed he meant exactly that after I asked him about it is too much for me to handle.
He said they should but he didn't feel they would so I assumed that was the reason. Never mind.
 
GK is a bit of a piss take in an all-time final, even in a light hearted draft such as this.

ETA Or, rather, I should say that he's too much of a piss take in said context. If you're looking for a deciding factor in an otherwise tight enough affair, he sticks out plenty.

That's a good point actually. Courtois in an all time finale is a deal breaker for me.
 
Don't worry, I'm close to having one given that people are commenting on the gap between schmeichel and courtois but no one bothered mentioning the gap between maier and Julio Cesar in my game.
Crappy just reminded me of this. Didn't reply earlier as I had no time.

Not that I've ever done this systematically (it's against my nature), but it's the right way to go about it. Before a game list the main points, then which are likely to be brought up by other punters and, particularly, which are harder sells if raised by you and not a "neutral".

Most of us are quite predictable and you only need to look at who picked who before to anticipate unintended allies.

E.g. not bias but genuine appreciation would lead Balu to defend Lahm here and harms to appreciate Netto in that role. I love it when the central players are equally capable out wide on the same side, etc. Chester can always be trusted to bury his teeth into the keeper issue one way or the other.

The easiest one to predict here was if Jayvin had a high line Aldo would have posted all his favourite Maradona vs Baresi clips. Instead, he went for cutting the source so the moment someone suggested a high line, who voiced his approval with a megaphone? Aldo, obviously.

You did what I usually do, which is spam the thread with repetitive manager exchanges 80% won't even read.
 
Pelé was a true number 10: his position on field and the formations from the golden age of Brazilian football
Posted by Otávio Pinto on 14 de julho de 2016

In order to understand Pelé’s position on field, it is necessary to explain the tactical formation of Brazilian football during his reign. Almost every Brazilian team played in a 4-2-4, organized like this (adapted, not literal translation): goleiro (goalkeeper); lateral direito (right-back), quarto-zagueiro (centre-back on the left), zagueiro central (centre-back on the right) and lateral esquerdo (left-back); médio-volante (defensive midfielder) and meia-armador (midfield playmaker; also called meia-direita); ponta-direita (right winger), centroavante (centre forward), ponta de lança (literally “spearhead”, to be explained later) and ponta-esquerda (left winger) — about the origin of such terms, I recommend reading an article in Portuguese written by experienced Brazilian journalist Alberto Helena Júnior).

The most traditional number assignment from midfield to attack was this: 5, volante; 8, meia-armador; 7, ponta-direita; 9, centroavante; 10, ponta de lança; and 11, ponta-esquerda. About the number 10, it is important to inform that it only became a synonym of the ponta de lança after Pelé wore it in 1958 (Brazil’s numbers were determined randomly).

Botafogo, Brazilian Champions in 1968, and the Santos, that won basically everything in 1962, strictly followed that criteria (none the less, some times, like Cruzeiro, used to invert numbers 8 and 10: Tostão, ponta de lança, played with the 8, Dirceu Lopes, meia-armador, wore the 10):



In this classical formation, the team’s main organizer was the meia-armador (responsible mainly for playmaking; usually did not score much). However, the ponta de lança (regularly the team’s leading scorer), besides going forward to make plays with the centroavante, had a double job, because he also went back to help the meia-armador in making plays; that was the famous “8 and 10” duo in the midfield.

To illustrate what was explained above, Santos formation in 1962 (very nice work done by the excellent webpage “Imortais do futebol“; personally, I would add an yellow arrow going back for Pelé, showing his retreating to midfield during parts of the game):



One can notice that, during a significant part of the game, the ponta de lança played behind three other forwards (pontas and centroavante), specially when coming back to make plays. When he went on to the attack, he would make a duo with the most advanced player, o centroavante.

Few Brazilians know that this division of roles remained predominantly in Brazilian football until the end of the 80’s. In 1988 it was still used for the “Bola de Prata”, awarded by “Revista Placar” (the most famous football magazine in the country) to best players (by position) of the national league (notice that the great Zico is in the list as a ponta de lança; pay attention, those are only the preliminary results from that year):


Revista Placar, n. 962, 11/11/1988.

Only in 1989, (picture below), the magazine went on to make a team with: two “Meias” (attacking midfielders), putting both meia armador and ponta de lança into the same position (for example, Cuca and Toninho, pontas de lança in 88, were placed as “Meias” in 89); and three atacantes (forwards), placing both wingers and centre-forwards in the same spot. From 1996 on, another defender was added in place of a forward in the final team of the year — both remaining forwards were usually a duo of a second striker and centre-forward).


Revista Placar, n. 1007, 09/29/1989.

1958 and 1970 Brazil

That foundation was kept throughout the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s, but, we still saw changes, innovations and adaptations in the period, mostly in the Brazilian National Team in World Cups.

In 1958, Zagallo, ponta esquerda (left winger), was brought to the midfield, and Brazil played in a 4-3-3.


1958 Brazil by André Rocha.

Brazil in the 1970 World Cup, as explained by the competent Brazilian journalist, André Rocha (free translation here and everywhere else):

The magical national team of the “number 10’s”, chosen as the best of all time did not dominate solely on talent. Prior to that, there was a good execution of the 4-3-3 that, seen today, was a perfect 4-2-3-1 with only Tostão upfront, without the ball and with great mobility. Also speed in counter attacks, deciding most games in the second half because of the team’s great psychical training .


1970 Brazil by André Rocha.

Zagallo, Brazil’s coach in that World Cup, stated another characteristic of that unforgettable team: “We defended in a 4-5-1. Only Tostão stayed upfront. But even he went back, if needed“.

It is usually claimed that the Seleção in 1970 played with five “number 10’s”. In their teams, Rivellino, Gérson (at São Paulo FC in that year), Jairzinho and Pele, played with that number. However, in regards to what really meant to be a “10”, Brazil had four of such players (since Gérson was a meia armador): Rivellino (who also could play as a meia-armador, but he won his only “Bola de Prata” as a ponta de lança), Tostão (although he wore the 8 for Cruzeiro), Pelé and Jairzinho (“I was a ‘ponta de lança’ a number 10”; Rogério was the right-winger for Botafogo).

PELE’S POSITION

Some journalists and football fans, when discussing a “true number 10”, usually mention Maradona, Zidane, Zico, Platini, among others. A few of them define Pele like that. However, from the information reported here and later on, I believe it’s possible to state that Pele was a “true number 10”, like Zico, Platini and Maradona. The more careful reader notices that I did not mention Zidane. Yes, in my opinion, Zizou, in the Brazilian tradition, was closer to the old number 8, the meia armador. Let’s see, the main playmaker of his teams, the French player did not use to enter much the opponent area and scored very few goals (0.19 career average). On the other hand, players in the mold of Zico, Pelé, Platini and Maradona, helped in making plays, but were also great scorers with goal averages considerably superior to Zidane’s in official games: Platini and Maradona with a little more than 0.5 per game; Zico, approximately 0.7; and Pelé, 0.93. Because of that, I consider a mistake to talk about a “true number 10”, as someone supposed to be “the brain of the team” (the main playmaker), because that was the role of “the true number 8”.


1981 Flamengo by André Rocha. Notice how the traditional tactical base (with small variations) is still there: : volante (Andrade), meia-armador (Adílio), ponta de lança (Zico), ponta-direita (Tita), centroavante (Nunes) and ponta-esquerda (Lico).
 
Furthermore, other evidences suggests Pele played in the same position as Zico and Maradona. Both 80’s legends were called “ponta de lança” in Brazil. Regarding Zico, check again the picture of the 1988 “Bola de Prata” and Flamengo’s tactical formation above . As for Maradona, César Luis Menotti, who coached Argentina in the their 1978 World Cup victory, said the following words, reported by “Placar Magazine” in the end of that year (image below — in the article, the 18 year old Diego is called a ponta de lança): “In the current stage of world football, Maradona is Pelé. There is a difference in physical structure, but a lot of similarities in the space in which he plays, in the kind of long passes he makes. And he is a goal scorer”.

Maradona-novo-Pel%C3%A9.jpg

Revista Placar, n. 449, 1/12/1978

In their teams, Maradona and Zico always played in advanced roles, behind only one or two forwards. The Argentine, for example, in the 1986 World Cup, highlight of his career, only had Valdano in front of him; and for Napoli, there were two forwards, Careca and Carnevale. Likewise, Zico and Maradona were capable of playing as second-strikers.

See below how similar were the positions of the three legends on field:


1970 Brazil by André Rocha.


1982 Brazil, by André Rocha


1989 Napoli by “Imortais do futebol”.

Also relevant to reinforce the comparison of Pele to Zico and Maradona, the opinion of the legendary Tostão, “O Rei” teammate in 1970 and, currently, a brilliant columnist:

Na In the old terminology, Zico was a ‘ponta de lança’, a forward that retreated to the midfield to get the ball, dribbled, made give and go’s, put his teammates in front of the goalkeeper and scored spectacular goals, of all types. It was the 10. The King Pelé and the super great players Maradona, Di Stefano, Cruyff and Platini, also played in this position .

The ‘ponta-de-lança’ was similar to the current playmaker or attacking midfielder, the player who made the link between midfield and attack, like Kaká, Alex and Zidane and others. The ‘ponta de lança’ was more of a forward than a playmaker. The current attacking midfielder is more of a playmaker than a forward. Rivaldo and Kaká have more characteristics of a ‘ponta de lança’, forward. Zidane, Alex and Ronaldinho are more like playmakers.

As we can see, Tostão calls Pelé, Maradona and Zico as ‘Pontas de Lança”. Although he used the word “forward” to describe such position, it is clear, by his explanation, that those players had similar roles to current and recent attacking midfielders like Kaká and Rivaldo.

Moreover, it is important to read the words of Jairzinho, leading scorer for Brazil in the 1970 World Cup: “I was a ‘ponta de lança’, a number 10 (…) Botafogo from that Time had Roberto Miranda as the centre-forward. Pelé, at Santos, had Coutinho. Evaldo for Cruzeiro. And so on. None of was really a forward”.

Well, we have seen that Pele was a ponta de lança, with similar roles as Zico and Maradona. All those three great footballers made plays and scored lots of goals. To corroborate those arguments, it is essential to inform that Pelé himself called himself in his autobiography “an attacking midfielder” (London: Simon & Schuster UK Ltd. 2006. p. 41).

Still in that perspective, Cláudio Adão, great centre-forward from the 70’s and 80’s, Pelé in the early 70’s, recently explained, in an interview for “ESPN Brasil”, why he had to change his position in the beginning of his career (I’ve edited this post and added this quote in 07/19/2016):

No, when I started at the youth system, I was an attacking midfielder. But as I was moving up, Mr. Macia himself, Pepe, said: ‘Hey, you should move to centre-forward, because if you move to the senior team, you won’t play there (as an attacking midfielder)’ . Because there was ‘the man’ (Pelé). Then I had to adapt as centre-forward, playing with my back to the goal.

Pelé can’t be considered a pure forward, because, despite constantly entering the box to shoot at goal, he used to retreat back to defense with a much higher frequency than current footballers from that role (Messi, for example, unlike Pelé, has even played as the most advanced forward in his teams, the “false 9”). In this sense, observe the map done by the French newspaper L’Equipe, showing where Pele touched the ball in the 1970 World Cup final:



Nonetheless, several football all time XI selections put Pele as a forward, or, astonishingly, as a centre-forward. It was not like that during his playing days, as we can see in the yearly World XI in the 60’s, done then by English journalist Eric batty, in the renowned “World Soccer Magazine”. Next 1962 and 1966, respectively, as examples (images taken from the blog “Beyond the Last Man”):

Oddly, Batty chose the outdated 2-3-5 formation, where, between the “five forwards”, two had similar roles to today’s attacking midfielders (playing behind three real forwards, as taught by Alberto Helena). Where was Pele placed? Precisely at the position that today would be the attacking midfielder, behind three forwards. Incongruously, “World Soccer” in 2013, made a worldwide survey among journalists to choose the all time XI, and, disregarding its own history, put Pele in the same section as centre-forwards like Romário, Ronaldo, Van Basten and Gerd Müller. Several journalists even committedthe sin of putting Pele as the most advanced forwards of their “dream teams”. On the other hand, the webpage of Globo (Brazil’s biggest TV station), rightly put Pelé among the attacking midfielders (“Meias”), together with players like Zico, Rivaldo, Rivellino, Ronaldinho and Kaká, in its online survey to choose Brazil’s all time XI; Pelé was the most remembered players with over 306 thousand votes.

There stills lies a question: what role would Pelé have in the most used tactical formations today?

The King would definitely not be a pure playmaker like Iniesta, Ozil and Fabregas, players similar to the meias-armadores (number 8) from the past, main organizers from their team and who don’t score much. In his original position, Pelé could play in a 4-2-3-1 as the central attacking midfielder or as the sole attacking midfielder for the team in a 4-3-1-2. Although not ideal, he would also be effective as a second striker (in some forms of 4-4-2 or 3-5-2), ou even as side forward in a 4-3-3 (not as winger, but as someone who would cut to the middle a lot and would participate in the playmaking there, like Messi, recently, for Barcelona).

Therefore, based on everything I’ve written, I believe Pele was an attacking midfielder, a “true number 10”.
 
Henry on the left was good with France at the Euro 2000. His goal against Denmark was nice for instance.

300px-FRA-ITA_2000-07-02.svg.png
 
There should be no debate about pele so long as he's in an attacking position.
 
The easiest one to predict here was if Jayvin had a high line Aldo would have posted all his favourite Maradona vs Baresi clips. Instead, he went for cutting the source so the moment someone suggested a high line, who voiced his approval with a megaphone? Aldo, obviously.
It's scary how absolutely spot on that is. :lol:

What are your remarks on the presentation? Not that I'm not filled with nostalgia looking at a footballuser teamsheet, but we said goodbye to that site precisely for formations like these, like the 3-4-1-2 here where players on that small pitch looked congested and that was my first reaction here - 'that looks like an absolute clusterfeck'. This is what made us move to this11 and then sharemytactics, so it's an odd one here.

There should be no debate about pele so long as he's in an attacking position.
That used to be the line of argument years ago when draft threads were mainly reduced to dick swinging and loads of x>y, thankfully the tactical detail is given a lot more attention now and the threads are infinitely better to read.
 
It's scary how absolutely spot on that is. :lol:

What are your remarks on the presentation? Not that I'm not filled with nostalgia looking at a footballuser teamsheet, but we said goodbye to that site precisely for formations like these, like the 3-4-1-2 here where players on that small pitch looked congested and that was my first reaction here - 'that looks like an absolute clusterfeck'. This is what made us move to this11 and then sharemytactics, so it's an odd one here.


That used to be the line of argument years ago when draft threads were mainly reduced to dick swinging and loads of x>y, thankfully the tactical detail is given a lot more attention now and the threads are infinitely better to read.

Exceptions to the rule surely. It's one of the positives for blocked players
 
Same old people spouting the same old clichés!

Went for skizzza.
 
Jesus, you need to get a grip - seriously.

This is what i said:


It was a light-hearted comment because you do have a tendency to defend German/Munich players.

I really don't see why you're that upset or arsed, particularly how within 10 minutes you went off and started claiming that other posters were overrating players of their own. No one else is getting all sensitive about it, just chill out.


You do talk an awful lot of shit, and you know far less about the players that you talk about than you like to let on.

Lahm being questioned as a WB is a joke imo, I agree that he is a bit boring but who else is a better alternative? Not many players at all could occupy that position as well as he could.
 
It's scary how absolutely spot on that is. :lol:

What are your remarks on the presentation? Not that I'm not filled with nostalgia looking at a footballuser teamsheet, but we said goodbye to that site precisely for formations like these, like the 3-4-1-2 here where players on that small pitch looked congested and that was my first reaction here - 'that looks like an absolute clusterfeck'. This is what made us move to this11 and then sharemytactics, so it's an odd one here.

Instant loss. I felt the nostalgia but I just rolled my eyes at what looked like Lahm doing a Beckham.

Funny thing was when I stuck arrows on one of those I got all sorts of crap for it. "Spaghetti formation" yadda yadda.
 
peter-schmeichel-01-600x400.jpg


I guess it's fair that in a close encounter like this Schmeichel made the difference :drool:

article-2302604-190A388B000005DC-285_470x665.jpg