I was kidding, sort of. I haven't even voted myself waiting for some change/brainfart, although I did say earlier I certainly couldn't see harms winnign the way it was laid out. Draw is a legitimate outcome, I've no problem with that, let alone in this game. In fact, I'd rather see someone voting the draw than waiting around seeing X managers haven't voted when that vote won't be forthcoming.
Manager Draft Final - Harms VS Edgar
- Thread starter Annahnomoss
- Start date
I was kidding, sort of. I haven't even voted myself waiting for some change/brainfart, although I did say earlier I certainly couldn't see harms winnign the way it was laid out. Draw is a legitimate outcome, I've no problem with that, let alone in this game. In fact, I'd rather see someone voting the draw than waiting around seeing X managers haven't voted when that vote won't be forthcoming.
I was not sure. Just recollection from some previous game.
1st sub allows change in tactics. 2nd sub makes it almost a brand new game, imo. Just wipes out what happened till now.
Nah the whole point of Lothar being best b2b of all time is that he does not need to have 2 MF men alongside him to play his best game. At his absolute peak he should be able to do participate both in defensive and offensive side of things. That's what you want from your B2B. According to you he is like Yaya whose best role is in front of 2 CMs.
I don't like this MF change so I have switched my vote to Edgar. Sorry @harms
I wouldn't fret it. You're 17-9 up and he's brought on Guiseppe Furino - a man with a whole 3 caps for Italy.I was not sure. Just recollection from some previous game.
1st sub allows change in tactics. 2nd sub makes it almost a brand new game, imo. Just wipes out what happened till now.
Bit boring that all these PES boys have keeper skills set at 50. Clearly there are differences here. What does Sheasy have, for instance?
EDIT Fifty. Bollocks. Sheasy was easily a 57, possibly a 58, in his pomp.
EDIT Fifty. Bollocks. Sheasy was easily a 57, possibly a 58, in his pomp.
To settle the playmaking conundrum:
Platini
Short Pass Accuracy: 95
Short Pass Speed: 83
Long Pass Accuracy: 97
Long Pass Speed: 85
Matthäus (1988-1992)
Short Pass Accuracy: 88
Short Pass Speed: 89
Long Pass Accuracy: 90
Long Pass Speed: 88
Redondo, with a heck lot defensive responsibilities
Short Pass Accuracy: 91
Short Pass Speed: 86
Long Pass Accuracy: 87
Long Pass Speed: 84
Gullit (1987-89!!) - so, worse under Capello:
Short Pass Accuracy: 88
Short Pass Speed: 87
Long Pass Accuracy: 87
Long Pass Speed: 90
Nedved
Short Pass Accuracy: 85
Short Pass Speed: 87
Long Pass Accuracy: 86
Long Pass Speed: 88
Boniek
Short Pass Accuracy: 85
Short Pass Speed: 84
Long Pass Accuracy: 85
Long Pass Speed: 83
Platini
Short Pass Accuracy: 95
Short Pass Speed: 83
Long Pass Accuracy: 97
Long Pass Speed: 85
Matthäus (1988-1992)
Short Pass Accuracy: 88
Short Pass Speed: 89
Long Pass Accuracy: 90
Long Pass Speed: 88
Redondo, with a heck lot defensive responsibilities
Short Pass Accuracy: 91
Short Pass Speed: 86
Long Pass Accuracy: 87
Long Pass Speed: 84
Gullit (1987-89!!) - so, worse under Capello:
Short Pass Accuracy: 88
Short Pass Speed: 87
Long Pass Accuracy: 87
Long Pass Speed: 90
Nedved
Short Pass Accuracy: 85
Short Pass Speed: 87
Long Pass Accuracy: 86
Long Pass Speed: 88
Boniek
Short Pass Accuracy: 85
Short Pass Speed: 84
Long Pass Accuracy: 85
Long Pass Speed: 83
No worries! I'm not hoping to win this game now, just having fun and experimenting. Thanks for your vote in the first place
Trap's Matthäus played in a four man midfield and he was the chief architect/playmaker in the team, his job wasn't to do the dog's work that a two-man midfield demands. Seems like you are extrapolating the title of "Best B2B of all time" (wherever it came from) into can do everything, everywhere, equally well, no matter how many others are grafting or the opponents faced.
There's absolutely no way Matthäus would have the sort of influence he used to in the prior setup, no chance.
What's the verdict on the status of "draw", then?
If "draw" gets the most votes (bear in mind the manager double vote), do we get pens? For my money it should be that way. Like I said above, "draw" here doesn't equal "undecided". Using yours truly as an example, I didn't vote "draw" because I can't make up my mind - I have made up my mind, and my opinion is that this match would end in a draw, most likely a boring-as-feck 0-0 affair.
If "draw" gets the most votes (bear in mind the manager double vote), do we get pens? For my money it should be that way. Like I said above, "draw" here doesn't equal "undecided". Using yours truly as an example, I didn't vote "draw" because I can't make up my mind - I have made up my mind, and my opinion is that this match would end in a draw, most likely a boring-as-feck 0-0 affair.
Well, doesn't matter.
- Desailly is still on Platini.
- Maldini is still on Boniek.
The freeing up of Nedved would really help Redondo. When we have the ball, he will easily connect with graft of Nedved and between them the would get a one-up on Furino. Now I have ways to the goal on both flanks.
- Desailly is still on Platini.
- Maldini is still on Boniek.
The freeing up of Nedved would really help Redondo. When we have the ball, he will easily connect with graft of Nedved and between them the would get a one-up on Furino. Now I have ways to the goal on both flanks.
Harms is lucky he's got Bergomi and Matthaus on the park. They could have been teaming up with Cutch.
I would assume draw votes are split even. The decision would be made by rest of votes.
I'm not disputing Matthäus ability or suitability in the midfield duo role with 5 at the back. I was just stating that he would be more free to make an impact offensively with another consistent holding presence in midfield behind him, which was your initial query if I'm not mistaken.
Make no mistake about it, he is a monster in both roles but the latter set up as a whole makes more sense in this encounter for me at least.
Edit: It also makes Lothar a more pro active and a probing presence with greater freedom instead of the relatively more reactionary and disciplined presence in the midfield duo. I'd prefer the former version to the latter any day, not that he can't do the latter role well. The change does wonders for Platini as well.
Last edited:
It probably should, but it won't be fair to introduce this rule in the middle of the draft. It would be a great option that would be used, hopefully, on a very rare occasions.
Er...what!? And the point of having 'em would then be...what?
Not to mention that you can't split 'em even if they ain't even in numbers.
4 managers have voted for you, 4 have voted for me & 4 have voted for a draw. This is weird!
We know they have made a decision, rather than just not voing due to being undecided.
So, all very good passing the ball, with Platini standing out head and shoulders over the rest. Did you need PES Stats for that? While we are at it, I don't think those stats define a playmaker. Sure, you need to be able to pass the fecking ball, but you need a brain that reads the situation and picks the right pass, and then move accordingly, etc.
I know you were kidding anyway.
I suppose that's fair - yes. Though I don't see how it would be blatantly unfair to anyone if they were introduced for the final. It would be hard to argue that either of you have assembled your teams and chosen your tactical approaches based on the idea that the match cannot end in a draw.
So what? It's nice to know, I suppose, but as long as it doesn't influence the outcome, it hardly matters.
Anyway, next draft, etc.
By the way, for what it's worth, the third option was introduced in this draft after someone (I believe it was you, actually!) asked Annah to have his vote withdrawn. It was then suggested that a "withdraw vote" option was added, which Annah promptly did.
In the next match the option was retained - but people clearly used it for different purposes than to withdraw their vote; in practice it stood for either "wait and see, looks bloody even" or "too close to call". At that point I personally suggested that the option be renamed "draw", for the sake of tidiness. The latter wasn't actually done until this match, though.
I think a third "draw" option is a good idea. It removes the possibility of those tactical votes many seem to dislike, i.e. that people vote for the man who happens to be one down because they want the match to end in a draw (seeing this as the fairest outcome).
But it's absolutely pointless to keep this third option as a permanent fixture, calling the option "draw", if these votes do not count. If they do not count, then the option should be called "withdraw vote" and should only be retained as a practical means allowing people with cold feet to change their mind about voting for ANY outcome.
In my opinion.
Last edited:
That's your opinion. I don't see why you need Scirea, Kohler, Bergomi, Gentile, Cabirni, Tardelli and Lothar all doing mostly defensive stuff to deal with Basten, Guilt, Nedved, Cafu, Rijkarrd and occasional Redondo runs. It's almost as if Edgar has an extra attacking player on the pitch. In fact harms was correct earlier when he said that both someone like Rijkarrd/Redondo is getting credit for making it hard for both Platini and being in a CM battle with Tardelli/Lothar.
Edited. Don't mind me, it's just another case of me misreading the post in the middle of the night. Going to sleep
Last edited:
I agree with the sentiment but the reason for that was having one defender too many, i.e. I didn't see why he needed Gentile out of those you listed.
Juve's, unlike Milan's, was largely a deep-siting defence so you need the midfielders to squeeze the space the oppo operates in. You can't have a deep-sitting five man defence with only two midfielders shielding it and not have those two working on that almost full-time, else the attackers drop deep and work things out at will. It's not a function of how many players EAP has attacking, it's a matter of space between the lines. Sure, Scirea can step up but his job was to sweep and step up once in possession to dictate play, not really stepping up and turning into a permanent midfielder. Effectively, the five at the back didn't have much work to do and the two in midfield were overworked, taking off a defender and adding a mdifielder was a pretty straightforward way to rebalance things.
Re: Rijkaard/Redondo, I don't think I even once mentioned that, it's pretty obvious to me that is Desailly's job and Rijkaard/Redondo may chip in here and there but clearly it isn't them minding Platini.
Jut re-read this. Sounds fair. I misunderstood before.
that's clever, keep the fence-sitters on draw as "it counts for something" and leave it at 18 EAP - 12 DRAW - 10 HARMS
Nothing that devious. Any ways the debate was for next draft, not this one
I'm off to bed and won't wake till after the game ends. Nothing more to add though!
It's been a good game.
It's been a good game.
It's been a great game with excellent discussions and both you and harms have done a great job.
Every draft needs this, tbh
I totally forgot that I still can do the Furino formation
@Annahnomoss can you post this to OP? Sorry for being a tiresome contender.
I don't think that anyone scored so far anyway, but it seems inevitably that Van Basten will score the winner on 90+4 if I won't do anything.
@Joga Bonito thanks for the idea
BTW, @Annahnomoss changes in tactics aren't much use if they aren't updated in the OP.
Don't think he's been on since harms posted that.
Brehme as a RWB.
I know you don't have 4 CBs but I think three of Bergomi, Scirea and Gentile/Kohler would have been enough against EAP's attack of Van Basten and Gullit. Also, Its not the peak Gullit EAP has here. He has the post injury Gullit, who while a good player wasn't the same player he was in eighties. Not to mention he and Capello didn't get along that well either. So, your three of CBs of Bergomi, Scirea and Gentile/Kohler would have been enough to deal with Van Basten and a waning Gullit, IMO.
Also, I don't agree your defence isn't as good as EAP's. All of your defenders and midfielders played their best football and had their peak under Trap. A couple of EAP's players though didn't. I know I am clutching straws here but in a close match like this, that could have been the deciding factor.
This would have been my team:-
-----------------------Batistuta-----------------------
---------Baggio----------------------------------------
-------------------------Platini------------------Boniek
----------------Tardelli-----------Matthaus-------------
Cabrini----------Kohler-------------Scirea----Bergomi---
--------------------------Zoff--------------------------
Last edited:
That's what I was hoping Harms would play. I understand why he opted for more defensive solidity, but Gentile man-marking Nedved did seem like overkill. I like his new line-up though, and he's done such a great job throughout of researching individual match clips that I'm tempted to get off the fence and vote for him.
@3:34 in the morning.
I love you. Like going to a dry cleaner in the middle of the night then leave a complaint because they were closed asking for an apology.
Last edited:
That doesn't look good for harms. So what team could have challenged EAP here? Would a full strength Lattek side have a chance?
Field it, field it!