@Himannv let me know when you want to play.. I'll send my tactics in later today
Only Fools and Horses Draft
- Thread starter Šjor Bepo
- Start date
Go for Tuesday then, I'll throw something together tomorrow
Schedule
Tuesday - P-nut vs Enigma
Wednesday - EAP vs gio/mufc
Tuesday - P-nut vs Enigma
Wednesday - EAP vs gio/mufc
Sound, good luck mate, think you have the edge here given the injury round and also the vote deficit.
Didn't realise there was a vote deficit, but I'm sure you'll overturn it. Think my only draft win was with you
Sent mine in just now. Whenever you're free is fine with me (as long as it's not the weekend).
Yeah.. I sent mine in as well.. @Šjor Bepo feel free to start whenever
@Enigma_87 you good to go today?
will send shortly mate
sent @P-Nut
nah, we waiting on enigma and the rule is named after him for a reason...
Enigma and myself couldnt find eye to eye so @Michaelf7777777 as the second best loser will be your opponent @P-Nut . Please arrange your game 
@Michaelf7777777 my tactics are already in start whenever you're ready.
Shame though @Enigma_87 what was the sticking point?
Shame though @Enigma_87 what was the sticking point?
Essentially we argued about the formation. For bepo 5-3-2 and zona mista is the same formation, which I can't agree on.
I saw some double standards with the criteria considering the first QF and essentially formations passed like 4-2-3-1, compared to 4-4-2 before with the second striker withdrawn in the #10 spot and argued as a completely new formation, yet moving from 5-3-2 to zona mista was considered ineligible, solely by Bepo.
There was zero criteria before the RR what would be considered change of formation and it was only up to Sjor to decide whether he likes it or not, which is entirely subjective.
At the end of the day it's his draft, but having the draft organizer decide what type of formation the manager should play and whether or not is good enough and make changes he likes was the tipping point for me and takes away all the fun. He has the final say and who should progress or not, so we decided it's best to move on from this.
Good luck in the game and in the draft, mate.
I've also submitted tactics so anytime is fine
@Šjor Bepo start it up whenever you guys are ready
Ah shame, yeah probably best to just move on from it, it's been a draft more for fun than anything anyways
Tbf this is an interesting point. It’s hard to imagine those teams working in any way differently.
it was a Atletico 442 changed to a 4231, the difference is massive but id allow it even if it was a regular 442 changed to a 4231 as you get a n10 rather then a second striker + winger roles are completely different.
indy team was another example enigma tried to sell and tbf its a better one then himans but it still falls short compared to what enigma was selling in his team. Indy only change was Keegan moved up top from a n10 role, small change with addition of a high press so i allowed it.
Nice try, anyways....last post on this topic from me.
Need to have bigger squads if injuries and formation changes have to be incorporated.
Personally, not a fan of injuries. Would really hurt theme based teams. I get the idea of course, but wouldn't really be my cup of team
its a way to ruin super teams filled with superstars as i hate that + see how drafters react to problems + to up the value of versatile players...
just look at michael
no RR, loses his R1 player, doesnt want a replacement, makes the most dramatic transformation and will have a good chance of reaching the SF as the team is brilliant. Always loved the robot but after today he reached elite tier <3its a way to ruin super teams filled with superstars as i hate that + see how drafters react to problems + to up the value of versatile players...
just look at michael
Yea, as I said, I get what you are going for and it's pretty fine.
Just my 2 cents....Not really sure what was wrong in Enigma's team. It certainly fits the Grande Inter Zona Mista profile. If the issue is on suitability of players (Wimmer/Dalglish) etc, then that should be left to voters. Personally i'd have thought moving from a back 5 to a back 4 is a significant change in formation.
Wimmer is brilliant in that RW role, and that alone would have made that team worthwile for me already. Perfect role to use his characteristic wing play, dribbling & abnormous pace. Also an interesting tactical move to discuss in a match thread.
Aye, was thinking the same. Harsh DQ
Yeah, not really against that tactical change personally although I resent Atletico's 4-4-2 being equated to a 4-2-3-1. I love Simeone's setup and am not a huge fan of the 4-2-3-1 if I'm being honest as I find it slightly unoriginal. I specifically went for that number 10 type (Platini was my second choice) with the formation change in mind. I did consider a WM actually but that formation gets shafted on here, but perhaps we'll see that in a different round.
Aye that was my main point.
My midfield was going to be functioning very differently as well, considering Zidane needed to be substituted. The whole mechanics would be entirely different especially without a typical #10 in the formation, which in zona mista is also accurate representation rather than having a typical #10.
To be honest I intended to make that switch in formation in the drafting stage and exactly put Wimmer in a wide attacking role. He was brilliant in terms of manning a flank and with a tucked in RB it would have underlined that game of his, rather than use him as a wingback (or his natural b2b CM role), which IMO is very different mechanics, especially with someone like Bergomi behind.
@Enigma_87 I think if you had gone for a 4411 in the defensive phase with VDB on the left it would have looked much different but in practice would have done what you wanted. In possession VDB drifts to the central hole and Cabrini overlaps. Bergomi tucks in and Scirea moves forward.
yeah, this was another reason why I stuck to my decision to withdraw. 4-2-3-1 and 4-4-2 with a withdrawn striker with 90% the same personnel is practically just a phase of the game rather than different formation altogether. Naturally depending on whether the team is on or off the ball the position of certain players will be different, but making the same team press or not is not really something different in terms of formation, it's generally the same team with like for like replacements.
I was quite surprised that such mechanics were considered a major change in formation, whilst my effort was rejected.
for example my idea was to sell Neeskens in that playmaker role(something we almost never see him in drafts and that aspect of his game), de Beek in a CM/AM hybrid role, which I think is his zone, Fernandinho as a DM naturally.
That to me is very stark difference to how a midfield would function compared to my previous game with one dominant playmaker in Zidane and two CM's that support him and mainly have defensive functions.
Yeah, you are right, but generally when we depict formations it's usually in the possession stage, rather than defensive stage.
Either way my point was to present a different POV, which IMO is completely different to the 5-3-2 in terms of mechanics. For one is adding another midfielder at the expense of defender. For one it's going to be Bergomi to face the opposition winger directly in the defensive phase, compared to Walker in my previous game when tracking back.
I could have put Cabrini up on the left and make it a 3-4-1-2, but again that's really irrelevant point and all will spiral down to a variation in a particular phase of the game of zona mista set up. The mechanics are to me very different to 5-3-2, but then Sjor disagreed on that point, which again is a personal opinion and considering he has to approve it - fair play.
That's very harsh.it was a Atletico 442 changed to a 4231, the difference is massive but id allow it even if it was a regular 442 changed to a 4231 as you get a n10 rather then a second striker + winger roles are completely different.
indy team was another example enigma tried to sell and tbf its a better one then himans but it still falls short compared to what enigma was selling in his team. Indy only change was Keegan moved up top from a n10 role, small change with addition of a high press so i allowed it.
Nice try, anyways....last post on this topic from me.
I think this is where many voters misunderstand what I am going for because I tend to go to show the formation in the defensive phase. Drawing it in the attacking phase proper would look really odd because in your case Cabrini would probably be on the left-wing and high-up. I think going for an average position is what the voters think is happening but it is never made explicit. I do think this is something we need to discuss so we can accuratley understand how the teams are actually lining up.
It should represent the role overall rather than phases. If Cabrini is to play an attacking wing back role, he needs to be high up. Certainly doesn't mean he'll be loitering up there defensively.
I think it just needs to be clear. What do you think of the main pic being an average position map but require a defensive and attacking phase picture in the OP spoilered? It's extra work but I think it would make it much clearer how everyone is playing