P&G Draft - SF: Theon/Gio vs onenil

Who will win this match with the players in their prime?


  • Total voters
    18
  • Poll closed .

harms

Shining Star of Paektu Mountain
Staff
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
28,643
Location
Moscow
SEMI4.png
DIpnyRP.jpg

..................................TEAM THEON/GIO.............................................TEAM ONENIL


TEAM THEON/GIO TACTICS


A balanced and complimentary 3-5-2 designed to get the best out of Diego Maradona. In offence the front three are provided the perfect platform to impact the match, with a midfield filled with leadership/workrate and a world-class defence capable of keeping a clean sheet against any attack.

In possession Maradona provides the focal point, equally capable of running through the opposition or releasing Rivaldo, Batigol or Cafu/Marcelo with his exquisite passing range. The Argentine boasts the highest peak of any player and elevates the performances of those around him – given the calibre of his supporting cast he should be too hot to handle for the opposition midfield.

WHY WE HAVE THE EDGE:
  • DIVERSE AND RUTHLESS ATTACK – The attacking trio is complimentary and built to get the best out of our star man. Rivaldo is arguably the greatest of all time as a left sided second striker, offering an exceptional goal-threat whilst providing a natural presence presence out wide which creates space in the middle (something Cafu and Marcelo also provide in spades). Spearheading the attack is the quintessential #9 is Gabriel Batistuta – a technical and physical colossus who scored 85 in 117 games during 90’s Serie A and 54 goals in 77 games for Argentina.

  • MIDFIELD PLATFORM FOR MARADONA – In midfield we opted for two industrious warriors to shield the defence and stamp authority across the middle of the park, with Mascherano playing a more restrictive role whilst Bastian expresses himself box-to-box. In Schweinsteiger we have undoubtedly the most complete midfielder of the last decade – the midfield lynchpin who led Bayern to a historic treble and Germany to the ’14 World Cup (with a MOTM virtuoso performance in the final).

  • PROVEN BACK LINE – The defensive set up is completely natural and complimentary, with each player suiting their individual role in this system. On the flanks arguably the two greatest attacking fullbacks of all time flank a Juve-inspired back three reinforced with the greatest of them all - Gaetano Scirea. In a 3-5-2 set up I don't think there is a better defender in the history of the game (I'd take Scirea over Baresi in a 3-5-2) and likewise at wingback both Cafu / Marcelo are arguably the most devastating pairing possible in terms of offensive impact. As a souped-up version of Bonnuci, Scirea elevates a defence that was already the most effective in modern times - conceding an average of 0.59 goals per game over six years, the best record of any defence at any time from any of the big three European leagues (Serie A, La Liga and the Premiership).



TEAM ONENIL TACTICS

“Our foundation was technique and everything else was a matter of positioning and support. Good positional play meant that you didn’t have to run so far, so technique was able to come more easily to the fore.” - Johan Cruyff

“Sócrates reminded me of my hero as a boy, Faas Wilkes, a man who also played elegant and beautiful football that was above all technical.
Just like him, Sócrates could do what he wanted with the ball thanks to his enormous skill and vision. He knew where to position himself on the field of play. He was one of those players who did a little bit of everything, in the best sense. Sócrates scored a lot of goals. In that sense he reminded me of DI Stefano, who also scored a lot and was good in many other ways. ” - Johan Cruyff

“Putting on the pressure not by sprinting thirty metres, but by moving a few metres at the right moment...Everyone you give five metres of space looks like a good footballer, because they are not under any pressure...three metres away , its another story” - Cruyff

The main strategy is built around positional play, technique and constant pressure on the opponent’s defense. Cruyff and Socrates will drop deep and 1-2 to eventually attack the space in between the back 3. Conti and Ribery strive to pin back the wing backs but if they are left to the side CBs then they have a big advantage. The two side CBs are still a weakness that can be consistently exploited. I think tactically I have the advantage on both flanks with 2v1. Either the midfielders or wide CBs will have to peel off to supporting the wing backs and that is going to open up the space Cruyff and Socrates are genius at exploiting.

Bezsonov
This upgrade improves the flank’s defensive abilities while not restricting the offensive input. Strong on the ball, strong physically and very quick Bezsonov maintains the offensive ability to keep possession and attack directly but marries it with strength and defending.

Davids

The ultimate workhorse for a total footballing side. With his added technique and power, the man Marcelo Lippi called his one-man engine room gives balance to the side.
 
Question for both managers, how high a defensive line are both playing?
 
cheers @harms and @Theon

I feel Clodoaldo can excel here. What I feel my midfield can achieve here is that Davids and Clodoaldo is a superb attacking style double pivot that still has iron against attacking trios. Both can put in the work rate and tactical awareness to defend. He has excelled against similar attacking formations like Peru and Uruguay and most important Italy in the 1970 World Cup with Mazzola-Riva-Boninsegna being a similar style attack to what he faces here.
So if Davids is minding Maradona, Clodoaldo can be freed to create moves like this:





Here is an article I saved off the Wayback Machine:

Clodoaldo: The Altar Boy

‘If in your childhood or adolescence you didn’t have a very good life, I think it makes you fight for your goals with more determination than a person who has been born in a golden cradle.’

If they were being delivered upstairs in the corporate conference suites of Sao Paulo’s Hotel Melia, Clodoaldo Tavares Santana’s words might sound like another slice of self-help psychobabble, a glib one-liner from the latest motivational management manual. Whispered like a liturgy downstairs in the lobby of one of the city’s most opulent buildings, however, they carry a simplicity and sincerity it is impossible to find uninspiring.

On the surface, at least, Clodoaldo exudes the same look of well-pressed well-being as the American and Japanese businessmen milling around the hotel’s entrance. Dressed in an immaculate Italian shirt and slacks, a chunky Rolex on his wrist, he seems as natural a part of his surroundings as the polished marble and the crystal chandeliers. Beside him sits his mobile phone and his personal organizer. The cards in his wallet are probably platinum.

Yet in truth Clodoaldo’s roots could not lie further from this golden cradle of modern Brazil. The extraordinary story of his childhood and adolescence explains why he regards every day as a fight for his life.

EFGgh2xSvLMKOHxcyjU5OW4XbmtUTatQSBRtrHg_knardreQ296D5z-pvjK2a0buvEjtCz5jqJJk-aKn0rmMObeEkJuX2lfoqh8vkqioofjBCEbPY0HmQITv0z1DBifxMDNdOfzd


Appearances have always been deceptive where Clodoaldo is concerned. Back in 1970, for instance, he looked like an altar boy and played like an assassin. The twenty-year-old was the team’s energetic enforcer, its midfield fetcher and carrier, willing to run himself into the Mexican ground for the Brazilian cause. It was only in the dying minutes of the Final, as he began the unforgettable move that set up Carlos Alberto’s goal, that we glimpsed the angelic skills he had subdued for the greater good of what he still calls ‘the motherland’. Clodoaldo’s mazy dribble past four Italian defenders was an unscripted blend of football, samba and sheer humiliation. It was as if Nobby Stiles had suddenly turned himself into George Best.



Clodoaldo was born on 25 September 1949 in the town of Aracaju in the state of Sergipano in the north-east of Brazil, the youngest of ten children, four brothers and six sisters.

The north-east, or Nordeste is the poorest, most chaotic part of the country and that with the closest links to its African past. It was here that the vast bulk of the slaves were put to work in the darkest days of the colonialist nineteenth century. To many it is the soul of the country. ‘The core of our nationality, the bedrock of our race,’ the writer Euclides da Cunha called it. With his limpid, childlike eyes and utterly unaffected air, Clodoaldo has the sort of simple serenity that his big city countrymen make fun of but which comes as close as you can get to the essence of Brazil – if this vast, infinitely varied nation can be said to have such a thing at all.

There is much that is remarkable about Clodoaldo. That this tranquillity survived the tragic events of his early life is perhaps the most remarkable quality of all. Clodoaldo was just six years old when his life was altered for ever. ‘My parents were killed in a car accident,’ he explains, matter-of-factly. Understandably, Clodoaldo does not like to dwell on the details. It seems his father was a transport worker. Apparently the accident happened on a dangerous stretch of road outside Aracaju.

What is clear is that the loss so devastated the family that Clodoaldo and some of his brothers and sisters could no longer bear to live in Aracaju. With what little money they had, they made the long journey south, ending up in the town of Praia Grande on the southern seaboard, near Sa^·o Paulo. From there they moved on to the bustling port of Santos.

For his brothers and sisters, life in the south was no less forgiving than that they had left behind. Eventually they returned to the Nordeste. For Clodoaldo, however, there was no turning back. ‘I decided to stay and confront life alone,’ he says.

His fate was, of course, far from unique. Thousands of orphaned young boys lived a similar existence in the favelas of Rio and Sa^·o Paulo. There they learned to live by their wits, or perish. According to the colourful, conventional wisdom, the roots of the Brazilian footballing phenomenon lies on the streets of these shanty towns. It is here that boys learned to play football with rolled up socks and oranges. It is here they schooled themselves in the methods of the Malandro, a folklore figure popularized in the songs of the 1920s and 1930s. The Malandro was a workshy, bohemian rascal, a ducker and diver able to use his guile to move in all circles of life without being pinned down to responsibility by anyone. Football was an extension of the Malandro’s arts, a game to be played with spontaneity and the wisdom of the street. It was the philosophy of Garrincha. It may never have been better personified than in the streetsmart genius of Romario.

Clodoaldo lived on a morro, or hillside slum, on the edge of a small Chinatown in one of the poorest parts of Santos. Whatever means he used to survive, however, he was no Malandro in the traditional sense. To begin with, he was willing to work for a living and did so from the age of nine. With the consent of the local courts, to whom he was answerable as a minor, he was hired at one of Santos’ vast coffee warehouses.

He was too slight for the back-breaking routine of loading and unloading the coffee sacks at the docks. ‘I could not bear the weight,’ he says. Instead he spent long hours sweeping the floors and keeping the stores in order. What little time he had left was spent sleeping or playing pelada on the streets.

What he lacked in physicality he more than made up for in fighting spirit. By 1965 he had graduated to a small local club, Barreiro, from where he later moved on to the junior side of Santos. As his talent blossomed at the club’s famous Vila Belmiro ground, Santos’ coaches encouraged Clodoaldo to skip work to concentrate on his training. When his bosses at the coffee warehouse detected his waning interest they sacked him.

As an amateur Clodoaldo earned nothing from his football. ‘Not enough for a sandwich,’ he says, shaking his head. Once more forced to live off his wits, he turned first to the Catholic Church for salvation. The Church had offered some semblance of sense when his world had been turned upside down. He had, from the age of six to ten or so, spent part of most days performing his duties as an altar boy. With his future uncertain, he persuaded the priests at a Santos seminary to take him in. A quiet, contemplative boy, Clodoaldo briefly considered a life of the cloth. To their eternal credit, however, his temporary landlords encouraged him to follow another path. ‘They saw I had another vocation,’ he says with a gentle smile.

When Clodoaldo explained his predicament to his coaches at Santos, they came up with an alternative solution. For the next two years of his life, the Vila Belmiro stadium became Clodoaldo’s orphange instead.

As Catholicism’s most serious rival as a religion, it was perhaps fitting that football was second only to the Church in providing futures for the poor boys of Brazil. As Clodoaldo discovered, even for those boys who did not go on to become titulars or first team players, the benefits of being taken on the books of a major club like Santos were immense.

Boys could be taken on as young as ten or eleven, when they would become members of the mirim squad. Between the ages of twelve and fourteen they would graduate to the infantil team, then the juvenil between the ages of fifteen and seventeen. The clubs treated their investments like young princes. As well as providing players with a monthly allowance, boys could expect to have all their medical, dental and nutritional needs looked after. When Pelé joined Santos, for instance, he had been put on an intense high-protein diet and a calisthenics programme to build up his slight-framed body. The clubs also contributed to improving their boys’ education by putting them in the better big city schools. If their careers as footballers did not work out, they had higher education or white-collar work to fall back on.

For many boys from the rural areas of Brazil the intensity of the training and the big city left them feeling homesick. Pelé tried to run away from Santos after five days there. For Clodoaldo, however, life inside the Vila Belmiro offered security he had never dreamed of before. ‘I had lost my job and had no means to support myself. I had no salary but at least there at Vila Belmiro I had somewhere to sleep and somewhere to eat.’ For the next two years of his life, the Santos ground became his life. It has remained central to his very existence ever since.


As a boy in his favela, Clodoaldo was given the nickname Corro (pronounced Co-ho). ‘I was very small and there is a bird, in the North, called corro.’ By his seventeenth birthday, Corro was ready to fly.

In the mid-1960s, the step into the dressing room of the Santos first team was an intimidating one for any player. The all-whites of the Vila Belmiro were by now the most famous – not to mention the hardest working – team in not just Brazil and South America but the world. Their first team included three double World Cup winners – Gilmar, Zito and Pelé, two more 1966 squad members – Orlando and Edu, and two more new Brazilian national stars – Joel and Carlos Alberto.

Since winning the World Club Championship in 1961 and 1962, the all-star eleven had superseded Real Madrid as the glamour club of the international scene. The lucrative, whirlwind tours of the world that had come with the status had already earned them uncharitable comparisons with basketball’s Harlem Globetrotters.

A ‘lightning tour’ in the summer of 1969 summed up the treadmill-like existence that Clodoaldo suddenly found himself facing. In just over two weeks, Santos squeezed in seven matches in four countries, criss-crossing Europe to fulfil lucrative contracts in Yugoslavia and Spain, England and Italy. Even by the standards of the day, their travel arrangements were arduous. The final leg of their tour involved leaving Sarajevo at 5 a.m. for Manchester, arriving at 11.45 p.m. that night, travelling for a match at Stoke the following evening, then on to London and a 3 a.m. flight to Genoa that night. The miracle of their tour was that they returned unbeaten.

Pele was the unquestioned star attraction, filling stadia wherever he travelled. Clodoaldo shakes his head quietly at the memories. ‘Some people wanted to touch him, some people wanted to kiss him. In some countries they kissed the ground he walked on,’ he says. ‘I thought it was beautiful, beautiful.’

Yet, just as on the streets of Sao Paulo, Clodoaldo refused to be intimidated by the exalted company he was now keeping. Once more he soaked up everything he saw and heard. And once more he fought every day of his working life. Sharing a dressing room with Pelé was, he admits, an inspirational experience. ‘I would have been a fool if I hadn’t profited by learning something from the greatest player of all time,’ he says, laughing quietly at himself. ‘I learned lessons every day.’

Pelé taught his resilient young colleague to use his eyes as well as his heart. ‘Pelé was always ahead of everyone in reasoning, speed and physical condition. One of his main virtues was that he observed everything – the supporters, the terraces, the goalkeeper, the work of the referee. If Pelé was without the ball he was observing. I learned very much about this aspect with Pelé.’

On the training pitch, Clodoaldo saw the extent of Pelé’s vision. He would regularly embarrass his team-mates by exposing their weaknesses. ‘When you were marking Pelé in training, he knew when he controlled the ball which was your worst side and that was the side which he should go to,’ Clodoaldo says. ‘He was always, always in front of everybody.’

Yet if Clodoaldo had a hero at Santos, it was the man who wore the club’s No. 5 rather than its No. 10 shirt. Zito – with Didi – had been Brazil’s midfield lynchpin in both Sweden and Chile. With his pencil moustache and brilliantined hairdo, Zito looked more like an Argentine tango crooner than a footballer. For a generation he had been the sheet anchor of both the Santos and Brazilian sides. Though perfectly capable of breaking forward and scoring – as he proved in the 1962 World Cup Final when he scored Brazil’s second and decisive goal – Zito’s genius lay in his tireless tackling and simple yet destructive distribution. He was the closest the Brazilian national side had to a conventional, English-style right half. ‘As a man, as a leader, he has always been a person that I have modelled myself on. He was a world champion and great example,’ says Clodoaldo of the mentor to whom he still talks on an almost daily basis.

Under Zito’s watchful eye, Clodoaldo had eased his way into the Santos first team by his seventeenth birthday. Soon the Sao Paulo press had earmarked the teenager as the great man’s heir apparent. By 1967, the torch had been passed on in a suitably symbolic scene. ‘Zito was the absolute owner of the No. 5 shirt,’ says Clodoaldo, recalling the most powerful and evocative moment of his young career. ‘It was a game against Portuguesa de Desportos and we were in the dressing room. Zito called me and the coach over and he said “Today, the No. 5 shirt belongs to Clodoaldo”. That day he played with the No. 8.’ His eyes well up with tears as he recalls the moment. ‘Every time that I remember that I become emotional,’ he says, his voice faltering."

---

Here is a full performance of Clodoaldo vs. Uruguay

 
What I feel my midfield can achieve here is that Davids and Clodoaldo is a superb attacking style double pivot that still has iron against attacking trios. Both can put in the work rate and tactical awareness to defend. He has excelled against similar attacking formations like Peru and Uruguay and most important Italy in the 1970 World Cup with Mazzola-Riva-Boninsegna being a similar style attack to what he faces here.

So if Davids is minding Maradona, Clodoaldo can be freed to create moves like this:

Well firstly I don't think anyone can 'mind Maradona', if there was ever a player that required two or three defenders on him it was Maradona. In my opinion given the offensive quality that your facing you should be playing more defensively in midfield, particularly given it's not a completely solid partnership at the back. If the tactic is for Davids to hold deep and watch Maradona so that Clodoaldo can push forward (where he'll get picked up by Schweinsteiger) then I think that's asking for trouble and the offensive game of Clodoaldo isn't worth that risk.

Secondly I wouldn't say mine was an attacking formation at all, in contrast the whole theme of the team was to be rock solid through the spine and provide a platform for Diego and the front two. I think we've completely done that, Masch / Schweinsteiger are fantastic defensively, whilst that back line is rock solid particularly with Scirea (in my opinion the best defender all time in a 3-5-2) coming it to elevate it by a significant margin.
 
Think there's a few routes to goal for us in this match, but probably chief amongst them is Batistuta with this level of service vs Onenil's centre backs. I'm a big fan of Koeman and think that some of the criticisms he gets are far too harsh, but at the same time I don't think he has the physicality required to deal with a specimen like Batistuta (both stronger and quicker, with extremely good technique and movement).

In terms of pure aerial threat the 6 ft 1 Batistuta should pose a handful vs Koeman and 5 ft 6 Chumpitaz - I know Chumpitaz had a fantastic leap, but so did Batistuta and he's the significantly bigger player.

Tactically I'd say that Batigol fits this 3-5-2 system to an absolute tee, with a creative #10 behind him (not just any #10, the best of them all in Diego) which replicates his partnerships with Totti at Roma and Rui Costa at Fiorentina. Out wide he should relish the service from his Cafu (his Roma teammate) and Marcelo.

Ultimately when it comes to classic centre forwards I think Batistuta is the very cream of the crop, and IMO onenil's CB's are not natural fits for dealing with that threat at all (particularly Koeman).
 

GABRIEL BATISTUTA - ARGENTINA'S GREATEST NUMBER 9

Mario Kempes, Diego Maradona, Juan Roman Riquelme, Lionel Messi. The greats of the Argentina attack are usually number 10s. Then there’s Gabriel Batistuta, an archetypal and unashamed No9.

“Batistuta is the best striker I have ever seen,” says Diego Maradona. He would know a thing or two.

Gabriel-Batistuta-of-Fiorentina-celebrates-1024x680.jpg



Fiorentina’s all-time leading goalscorer, it would take Lionel Messi 112 Argentina appearances to break the 56-goal record Batigol set in 78 international caps.

A league notorious for its defending, Serie A was at the height of its powers in the 1990s, yet Batistuta netted 184 times there in his 13 seasons. That was done without one or two standout seasons – in nine years at Fiorentina he showed incredible consistency. Despite Batistuta's goals, those nine seasons with La Viola saw just two winners medals. The Coppa Italia and Supercopa, both in 1996.

“To tell you the truth [moving to a bigger club] didn’t interest me so much because, although there were titles, they were easy to win. I said: ‘No, I’m staying with Fiorentina and I’ll try to win something here because one title with Fiorentina is worth ten with Milan or Juventus.”

It was at Fiorentina that Batigol developed one of the great Serie A partnerships with the exquisite Rui Costa:

In a team that was lacking in defence and didn’t fare much better in the middle, Batistuta and Rui Costa were an attacking phenomenon, zigging in a league that chose to zag.

Fiorentina failed to compete for Serie A and eventually Batigol knew he had to leave if he were to finish his career with a major title. At age 31 Roma signed the forward for £27.5 million. He became the most expensive over-30-year-old – a record he still holds. It was the move that would finally deliver the trophy he sought. The Scudetto. With 20 goals Batigol became a legend in Rome as he fired I Giallorossi to their third, and last, Serie A title.

Once again Batigol demonstrated how well he dovetails with a #10, forming an exceptional partnership with Francesco Totti:

The chemistry between the captain and the striker was nearly telepathic.

Batistuta thrived off of Totti’s creativity, and returned it with slick assists himself from time to time. His primary job, of course, was to notch goals, and he so often finished with aplomb, showing off the kind of ice-cold confidence and power that only the very elite strikers have.​


Gabriel-Batistuta-e1498391895850.jpg

Batistuta was a very typical number nine. Yet somehow atypical.

He could do anything you would ask of a striker and do all of it well. When you watch his Serie A goals you see quickly he could score in any way: deft finishes, tap-ins, bullet headers, long-range efforts smashed home. It was all in his repertoire.

A player of huge stature, the most obvious strength was the power with which he could strike the ball from any distance. He had good control and was excellent in the air. His presence was intimidating and his attitude tenacious.

Then there are the subtleties to his game; the things big No9s don’t do. The more you watch Batistuta, the more you see the intelligent movement, the sly actions to gain any advantage, the malleability of his game.

As time goes on it becomes increasingly difficult to see where players from bygone eras would fit into the modern game, but not with Batistuta. In our current era without two strikers he would have no trouble leading the line alone, marrying all his attributes to combine the archetypal number nine with the agile and less restricted roles of forwards today. He had the technical ability and speed, the strength and intelligence, to drift wide or deep, to hold the ball up or play merely as a poacher.

One of the greatest strikers we’ve ever seen, Argentina’s greatest ever goalscorer and one of the best players in the history of Italian football, there is only one Gabriel Batistuta.

 
Cruyff is probably a perfect player against 3 at the back and Scirea. I would just like if there is a bit more firepower behind to take that advantage of him disorienting and driving crazy Theon defence with his movement and dribbling. Conti wasn't so prolific, Socrates was more of a playmaker, so while Ribery was great at his peak, in an all-time context he fails just a bit short imho.

On the other hand, attacking influence from both Theon's wingbacks would be massively reduced by onenil fullbacks.
But, Rivaldo and especially Batistuta could have a great game, as I don't rate Koeman that much in a defensive sense and Chumpitaz was not so impressive in the air (was very good, but it wasn't his biggest strength). Also, not sure how much Clodoaldo can influence upfront with Diego there and definitely not sure it is the best idea to occasionally leave Diego with just Davids.
 
Johan Cruyff should not be underrated here. Barzagli is a weakness in the defense and he will be targeted by Cruyff to exploit. Cruyff's dribbling and playmaking combined with goal scoring is not actually inferior to Maradona. It comes down to two matches really If Netherlands had won in 74 then Cruyff would be seen on the same level (at least) individually as Maradona. And Cruyff delivered against West Germany.



There is a debate to be had that Cruyff can have more influence on big matches more consistently than Maradona. Maradona was restrained in 1982 World Cup and in other seasons. He never won a Champions League for instance while Cruyff led Ajax to 3! I found this data from a post citing Opta Sports data:

CRUYFF 1974 VS MARADONA 1986

PLAYER, PASSES/GAMES = PASSES PER GAME
Cruyff , 332/7 = 47.4
Maradona, 262/7 = 37.4

PLAYER, SUCCESSFUL PASSES /PASSES = PASSING ACCURACY
Cruyff , 270/332 = 81.3%
Maradona = 209/262 =79.8%

PASSING ACCURACY OPP. HALF
Cruyff = 69.2%
Maradona = 67.6%

PLAYER, CHANCES CREATED /GAMES = CHANCES CREATED PER GAME
Cruyff , 36/7 = 5.1
Maradona, 27/7 = 3.9


 
Cruyff is probably a perfect player against 3 at the back and Scirea. I would just like if there is a bit more firepower behind to take that advantage of him disorienting and driving crazy Theon defence with his movement and dribbling. Conti wasn't so prolific, Socrates was more of a playmaker, so while Ribery was great at his peak, in an all-time context he fails just a bit short imho.

On the other hand, attacking influence from both Theon's wingbacks would be massively reduced by onenil fullbacks.
But, Rivaldo and especially Batistuta could have a great game, as I don't rate Koeman that much in a defensive sense and Chumpitaz was not so impressive in the air (was very good, but it wasn't his biggest strength). Also, not sure how much Clodoaldo can influence upfront with Diego there and definitely not sure it is the best idea to occasionally leave Diego with just Davids.

While the bolded is true, Socrates actually does have a pretty decent goal scoring record (almost 1 in 2) from his wiki page.

Edit: Koeman also has a great scoring record actually
 
Cruyff is probably a perfect player against 3 at the back and Scirea. I would just like if there is a bit more firepower behind to take that advantage of him disorienting and driving crazy Theon defence with his movement and dribbling. Conti wasn't so prolific, Socrates was more of a playmaker, so while Ribery was great at his peak, in an all-time context he fails just a bit short imho.

Nah can't agree with that, I'd say that Maradona has a far better platform here than Cruyff does - by quite a distance to be honest.

In terms of the area Cruyff is operating in it's a square of rugged defensive ball-winning ability and solidity. Chiellini / Scirea / Barzagli / Macherano / Schweinsteiger - all defensive players and fantastic ball-winners with a primary focus on Cruyff (by far Onenil's biggest threat). He's operating in an area which is extremely congested and I don't think he'll have an easy time finding space at all.

I'd also say the actual platform provided by his teammate's are questionable, as I'm not sure at all how a Socrates / Cruyff front two is getting the best out of Cruyff. Rather than another playmaker I think you'd want a runner or goalscorer there personally.

For Maradona, I'd argue it's the complete opposite. That Davids / Clodoaldo midfield is by Onenil's own admission playing quite adventurously. Maradona can cut through midfields like butter, and if he's left 1 vs 1 with Davids it's asking for trouble. Secondly I'd say that Onenil's defence has greater threats to worry about (as well as having one less defender), with Rivaldo and Batistuta being better attackers than anything Onenil has outside of Cruyff.

Thirdly I think it's clear that Diego has a real platform to influence the match and dominate the game - he's playing in a midfield which will defer to his attacking influence and there's very little overlap throughout the side. The whole team behind is rock solid and will keep things simple, recyclying the ball to Maradona so he can link with that front two (which are absolutely devastating - Rivaldo was the best player in the world at his peak, and should be too hot to handle for Bezsonov).
 
While the bolded is true, Socrates actually does have a pretty decent goal scoring record (almost 1 in 2) from his wiki page.

Edit: Koeman also has a great scoring record actually

Socrates was a very good scorer, I just think that someone who was more of a goal-threat (second-striker) would be a better fit than a player like him who's first thought would still be to provide that killer-pass upfront.

Koeman was excellent going forward, but I'm worried for his defensive game here facing Diego, Rivaldo and Batistuta.

On the other hand, there is Cruyff...
 
Cruyff is probably a perfect player against 3 at the back and Scirea. I would just like if there is a bit more firepower behind to take that advantage of him disorienting and driving crazy Theon defence with his movement and dribbling. Conti wasn't so prolific, Socrates was more of a playmaker, so while Ribery was great at his peak, in an all-time context he fails just a bit short imho.

On the other hand, attacking influence from both Theon's wingbacks would be massively reduced by onenil fullbacks.
But, Rivaldo and especially Batistuta could have a great game, as I don't rate Koeman that much in a defensive sense and Chumpitaz was not so impressive in the air (was very good, but it wasn't his biggest strength). Also, not sure how much Clodoaldo can influence upfront with Diego there and definitely not sure it is the best idea to occasionally leave Diego with just Davids.

Cruyff even said
"Sócrates scored a lot of goals. In that sense he reminded me of DI Stefano, who also scored a lot and was good in many other ways. ” - My Turn

My appeal would be that Socrates was perfectly capable of scoring goals when needed. He was just unselfish and also found joy in playmaking. For instance he scored 172 goals in 297 matches for Corinthians. When required he played as a false nine and got 5 goals in 6 matches for Brazil in 1979. And he is capable of scoring several types of world class level goals as shown below:

Long range shot after juke


creating and finishing from deep position:



poaching goal galore


selection of goals and assists



Then keep in mind goals from free kicks and penalties which a dribbling side like Cruyff-Conti-Socrates-Ribery can create at great frequency which neither of the modern side CBs have really faced before.

*Also Socrates is my favorite player and this is one of my ideal sides built around the combo of Cruyff-Socrates so its not something I am changing this draft. I am trying to maximize their impact on the match here.
 
Last edited:
Nah can't agree with that, I'd say that Maradona has a far better platform here than Cruyff does - by quite a distance to be honest.

In terms of the area Cruyff is operating in it's a square of rugged defensive ball-winning ability and solidity. Chiellini / Scirea / Barzagli / Macherano / Schweinsteiger - all defensive players and fantastic ball-winners with a primary focus on Cruyff (by far Onenil's biggest threat). He's operating in an area which is extremely congested and I don't think he'll have an easy time finding space at all.

I'd also say the actual platform provided by his teammate's are questionable, as I'm not sure at all how a Socrates / Cruyff front two is getting the best out of Cruyff. Rather than another playmaker I think you'd want a runner or goalscorer there personally.

For Maradona, I'd argue it's the complete opposite. That Davids / Clodoaldo midfield is by Onenil's own admission playing quite adventurously. Maradona can cut through midfields like butter, and if he's left 1 vs 1 with Davids it's asking for trouble. Secondly I'd say that Onenil's defence has greater threats to worry about (as well as having one less defender), with Rivaldo and Batistuta being better attackers than anything Onenil has outside of Cruyff.

Thirdly I think it's clear that Diego has a real platform to influence the match and dominate the game - he's playing in a midfield which will defer to his attacking influence and there's very little overlap throughout the side. The whole team behind is rock solid and will keep things simple, recyclying the ball to Maradona so he can link with that front two (which are absolutely devastating - Rivaldo was the best player in the world at his peak, and should be too hot to handle for Bezsonov).

Yeah, definitely can't agree on that, can't see him easily contained here. In terms of a striker (somewhat false 9), I can't think of a better player to attack 3 at the back, even with Scirea in there, than Cruyff. Mascherano and Schweinsteiger will also have their hands full with Socrates. Even though I said I think that probably some other type of player in this particular match would be a better fit, it's still Socrates.

Do agree with you on the part where you say that Diego has a slightly better platform to perform here.

Will vote after a bit more discussion.
 
Although I can see Socrates and Cruyff being on the same wavelength in terms of their intellectual understanding of the game, I'm not sold on their compatability in that central area. With Ribery and Conti operating out wide, the types of runs I can see Cruyff making aren't the peeling-out wide ones, but more the vertical up and down runs through the congested central channel of the pitch. It's the same space that Socrates will want to get on the ball and start dictating matters and I don't see him having the legs or aptitude to venture out wide much to create space for Cruyff to drop into. As much as I can see their intellectual and technical alignment, positionally for me at least it looks like they're clashing.
 
My appeal would be that Socrates was perfectly capable of scoring goals when needed. He was just unselfish and also found joy in playmaking. For instance he scored 172 goals in 297 matches for Corinthians.

Will quote PatMustard here from your previous game as I think the same argument applies:

Sweet feck, do you really think your using stats objectively, comparing Socrates in Brazil to Riva in Serie A? :lol:

When Socrates played in Serie A he scored 6 goals in 25 games - internationally for Brazil it was 22 in 60. That's a far cry from the better than 1 in 2 record he had playing in the Brazilian leagues. I don't think it's comparable to the goalscoring records of Rivaldo, Batistuta or Maradona in peak Serie A.
 
How do you guys see Conti & Bezsonov going against Marcelo ? To me it seem that the 3 man defense would often be stretched when Marcelo is caught out of position (Which he does very often for a top player).
 
Yeah, definitely can't agree on that, can't see him easily contained here. In terms of a striker (somewhat false 9), I can't think of a better player to attack 3 at the back, even with Scirea in there, than Cruyff. Mascherano and Schweinsteiger will also have their hands full with Socrates. Even though I said I think that probably some other type of player in this particular match would be a better fit, it's still Socrates.

Do agree with you on the part where you say that Diego has a slightly better platform to perform here.

Will vote after a bit more discussion.

Agree he won't be easily contained but I don't see what there is to disagree with there as Cruyff in my opinion is clearly operating in a 1. Completely congested zone 2. Filled with excellent ball winners 3. Who are mostly focused on stopping him.

In contrast Maradona faces far less resistance, against a weaker backline, who are also struggling to contain Rivaldo / Batistuta.

Disagree that Mascherano and Schweinsteiger would ever both "have their hands full with Socrates". When the opposition has actually said that Davids will be left 1 vs 1 with Maradona, it seems weird that Maradona and Schweinsteiger dealing with Socrates is perceived as the problem.
 
Okay here is another article for now in support of my Cruyff over Maradona influence claim for this match

The Myth of Maradona?


It’s long been the biggest debate in Football – who has been the greatest footballer of all time. The debate has generally included Pele, Cruyff, Best, Ronaldo, Zidane, and lately, Messi – but it’s usually Argentina’s Diego Maradona that comes out on top for the oft used line “he won things with poor teams”. Well I’m gonna look into the accuracy of that statement in an attempt to prove it’s relevance to the World’s greatest debate. The teams in question are Argentina’s World Cup winners of 1986, and Napoli’s Serie A winners of 1987 and 1990. I’ll put forward the data, will add my views and will let you decide:

Argentina 1986:

The best place to start is his greatest achievement in football, and the tournament for which he will be most remembered. The idea that he singlehandedly took his teams to glory was created on the back of the World Cup win in 1986 with an “ordinary team”.

Firstly, the defence:



Titles are won built on solid defences, and regardless of whether you have the best player of all time in your team or not, you won’t win anything without a solid defence. As seen from the table above, letting in less than a goal a game will go a long way to winning the World Cup, and the Argentina 1986 team conceded just five goals in their seven games, including three clean sheets. The previous winners Italy conceded six, and West Germany also conceded five on the way to lifting the trophy in 1990.

Secondly, the squad. We’ve already seen the defence were certainly good enough to win a World Cup, and there were also some other noticeable players alongside Maradona. Whilst he top scored with five goals, Jorge Valdano of Real Madrid (no less) also weighed in with four, including one in the Final. Elsewhere there was also quality from Oscar Ruggeri, Jorge Burruchaga and Sergio Batista. This was by no means a squad without talent.


Napoli 1987:

Once again, we’ll start with the defence. As with Argentina’s 1986 World Champions, Napoli’s 1987 Serie A winners were built on one of the strongest defences in the league. Conceding just 21 goals in 30 games (0.7 conceded per game), meant that they had a great base to build on. Of the 30 games, they kept clean sheets in 16 of them.

Next up, Maradona’s team mates. The team that won the title that year, ended up with 167 Italian Caps between them – hardly average players. The defence contained a young Ciro Ferrara who went on to win a second title with Napoli, and then to won six more with Juventus, along with the 1996 Champions League. Also in the squad were Italian Internationals Salvatore Bagni, Fernando De Napoli, Bruno Giordano (more of him later) and Andrea Carnevale. Not too shabby.

So it’s been established that the team had a fantastic defence and had other quality in Italian internationals. What did Maradona bring? Well, he was the Top Scorer that season and brought 10 goals in 29 appearances - a one in three strike rate. Of the 10 goals, 2 of them were penlties and two of his goals were scored in a 4-0 win over Empoli. So his goals only affected 9 of Napoli’s 30 league games.

So in reflection of the 1986-87 season, it’s fair to say that whilst his contribution was certainly impressive, and he was certainly their best player, he didn’t by any means carry the team to the title.

First and foremost, the defence was the foundation of the win, with 16 clean sheets. His team mates were by no means ordinary, and Maradona’s actual performance in the most important games were not the difference. Add to that the lower points tally that won the league and I think it’s fair to say that it was definitely not a one man show.

Napoli 1990:

After the glory of their first title in 1987, Napoli would only have to wait a further three seasons to win their second (and at the time of writing, last) Championship title. Once again, Maradona played a massive part in the 1990 triumph, in what was now a 34 game season (18 team league).

Once again, the title was built on a strong defence. In the 34 league games, they conceded just 31 goals, at a rate of 0.9 goals per game and 14 clean sheets. This was once again the second best defence in Serie A, second only to Milan. It’s once again fair to say that without this defensive display, Napoli wouldn’t have been Champions.

Moving on to his team mates, Napoli had strengthened since the 1987 title. Maradona could now list Brazilian International Careca amongst his team. The striker would score 73 goals for Napoli in just 164 games, as well as 29 in 60 appearances for Brazil. Playing alongside Maradona and Giordano, Careca made the final piece of the famous “Ma-Gi-Ca” attacking trio. Another new name from the 1987 triumph was a young Gianfranco Zola. The future Chelsea legend won the title in his first season with the Naples club. Elsewhere, the club had also strengthened in midfield, with another Brazilian international – Alemao, adding some steel in the middle of the park. In all, the 1990 Napoli squad contained players that would finish with over 280 caps for Brazil and Italy. Maradona was the brightest star, but by no means the only one.

And so after seeing another strong performance from the defence, and an improved squad, what was Maradona’s performance like? After starting the season at 29 – near the peak of most players careers, he enjoyed his best league season for the club, with 16 goals in 28 appearances


So as with his triumphs in 1986 and 1987, Maradona was undoubtedly instrumental. But they were far from ordinary teams that relied solely on their talisman to inspire.

---
 
The Myth of Maradona are you shitting me. :lol:
 

Johan Cruyff

Now Cruyff has much greater club achievements in his prime that were considered unmatched at the time.

Look at Cruyff's influence:

3OOB4ao.jpg


"Just once in European Cup history has a team lost the home first leg of a tie 3-1 and lived to tell the tale: AFC Ajax against SL Benfica in the 1968/69 quarter-finals. Johan Cruyff was the inspiration, scoring twice after Inge Danielsson's opener as the Dutch side stormed into a 3-0 lead in Lisbon. José Augusto Torres forced a replay in Paris a fortnight later, where the tie still hung in the balance after 90 minutes. Cruyff struck at the beginning of extra time, though, and two more from Danielsson completed the job.

- Cruyff had more successful dribbles in the 1974 World Cup (34) than any other player. This included his famous ‘Cruyff turn’ against Sweden.

- In the 1974 World Cup, Cruyff was also the player who created the most chances (36) and completed the most passes in the final third of the pitch (136).

- Between 1970 and 1974, the Netherlands lost only one of the 29 matches in which Cruyff featured — the World Cup final v West Germany in 1974.

International Goals

Cruyff 33 in 48 (.68 per match)
Diego 34 in 91 (.37 per match)



CRUYFF 1974 VS MARADONA 1986

PLAYER, PASSES/GAMES = PASSES PER GAME
Cruyff , 332/7 = 47.4
Maradona, 262/7 = 37.4

PLAYER, SUCCESSFUL PASSES /PASSES = PASSING ACCURACY
Cruyff , 270/332 = 81.3%
Maradona = 209/262 =79.8%

PASSING ACCURACY OPP. HALF
Cruyff = 69.2%
Maradona = 67.6%

PLAYER, CHANCES CREATED /GAMES = CHANCES CREATED PER GAME
Cruyff , 36/7 = 5.1
Maradona, 27/7 = 3.9
 
Agree he won't be easily contained but I don't see what there is to disagree with there as Cruyff in my opinion is clearly operating in a 1. Completely congested zone 2. Filled with excellent ball winners 3. Who are mostly focused on stopping him.

In contrast Maradona faces far less resistance, against a weaker backline, who are also struggling to contain Rivaldo / Batistuta.

Disagree that Mascherano and Schweinsteiger would ever both "have their hands full with Socrates". When the opposition has actually said that Davids will be left 1 vs 1 with Maradona, it seems weird that Maradona and Schweinsteiger dealing with Socrates is perceived as the problem.

Disagree that Cruyff would just make mostly those "vertical up and down runs through the congested central channel" like you mentioned before and now again. You will find him all over the attacking line, even wide when it's needed as he liked to move all over the place and attack the defensive line where he sensed it was weakest. You would probably often find him on Marcelo side, going at Chiellini or the opposite one, depending on the situation.

That's all from me, going into spectator position.
 
Disagree that Cruyff would just make mostly those "vertical up and down runs through the congested central channel" like you mentioned before and now again. You will find him all over the attacking line, even wide when it's needed as he liked to move all over the place and attack the defensive line where he sensed it was weakest. You would probably often find him on Marcelo side, going at Chiellini or the opposite one, depending on the situation.

That's all from me, going into spectator position.

Come on mate, I never said that Cruyff would make vertical up and down runs though a central channel. I know how he played I'm a huge fan of Cruyff. Firstly though it's a 3-5-2 so those three CBs can pull fairly wide, but secondly when he actually comes to causing most damage it'll inevitably be in those more dangerous areas where we're so solid.

I mean if Cruyff spends all this time away from each one of Schweinsteiger / Mascherano / Chiellini / Barzagli / Scirea then I'd consider that a good thing for the team. It's not as if Onenil has any other huge goalscorers in his team (as opposed to us with Rivaldo / Batistuta). Cruyff at his best obviously roamed but when he would destroy teams it wasn't by staying 60 yards away from the goal in front of Marcelo, he'd eventually drive in to dangerous areas and I think when he does we're clearly defensively very solid there.

That's all I'm saying and don't think that's controversial - it's not a criticism of Cruyff (which you seem to have viewed it as) to say that I'm pleased with the defensive structure of my own team in defence and midfield. Unlike Onenil based on that Maradona post I'm not trying to play any of these players down.
 
Come on mate, I never said that Cruyff would make vertical up and down runs though a central channel.

Sorry, it was what gio said, but you pretty much went along with that line of thinking in your previous post.

That's all I'm saying and don't think that's controversial - it's not a criticism of Cruyff (which you seem to have viewed it as) to say that I'm pleased with the defensive structure of my own team in defence and midfield. Unlike Onenil based on that Maradona post I'm not trying to play any of these players down.

Nah, absolutely not, it was just an observation on some of your and gio thoughts with my idea how Cruyff might operate here. That's all and nothing more.
And yeah, "The Myth of Maradona" is definitely going overboard. Goes without saying.
 
Sorry, it was what gio said, but you pretty much went along with that line of thinking in your previous post.



Nah, absolutely not, it was just an observation on some of your and gio thoughts with my idea how Cruyff might operate here. That's all and nothing more.
And yeah, "The Myth of Maradona" is definitely going overboard. Goes without saying.
Aye. And to be fair my comment had its origins in what Onenil said in the OP tactics - "Cruyff and Socrates will drop deep and 1-2 to eventually attack the space in between the back 3." Seems like a fairly central assignment to me.
 
@oneniltothearsenal the article you posted on Maradona seems a bit biased?

Sure you can make a case for Maradona having good to great players around him but it isn’t like Cruyff didn’t have any. So the point is a bit moot.

Both Cruyff and Maradona will have good games. It’s where gaps can be found. Tuppet raised an interesting point about Marcelo being targeted by Conti and Bezsonov. How do you see that battle going?
 
@Jim Beam @Indnyc

Oh come one. The Maradona article is a bit over the top but it doesnt really take itself seriously on that level you seem to be taking. My only point in posting in good fun is that it does have stats and arguments that go against the often perception that Maradona is a one man unstoppable force in his trophy wins.

Not meant for title to be taken so literally. And Cruyff does get underrated in recent years in my opinion. I really dont think there is very much between Cruyff and Maradona historically at their peaks. Cruyff genius is a bit forgotten recently.
 
Okay here is another article for now in support of my Cruyff over Maradona influence claim for this match
Don't see it. We have designed this to try and get the best out of Maradona and used many of the same principles that enabled him to shine at his most devastating best in 1986. Namely:
  • a proper 3-5-2
  • relentlessly hard-working and defensively solid midfield that will defer to Diego
  • flank-dominating wing-backs who will keep the play stretched wide to create space through the middle for Diego to horse through
  • classic no 9 reference point who shares the same nationality
  • a play-stretching left-sided attacker in Rivaldo who can peel wide and unfurl that left peg
Whereas Cruyff has to contend with another playmaker jostling for the same space in the hole. That is something he didn't have to work with for Holland in 1974 - where Van Hanegem had to play with the handbrake on in a much deeper role - nor with Ajax where he played ahead of 3 deeper CMs, nor at Barcelona. Nor is there the same wing-forward type threat in behind that was present with Holland or Ajax as Conti too will be inclined to cut inside onto his left and dictate terms, as he did so well for Italy taking on much of the attacking playmaking in 1982. Between Socrates and Cruyff, there is a lot of main-man playmaking going on which is typically what Cruyff demanded unilaterally to be. I'm not saying it's not a decent set-up for Cruyff and that he can't play outside of false 9 433s because that is just unimaginative nonsense (plus there are some tasty synergies in there), but I feel that our set-up for Maradona is more optimal than what is necessarily the case to the same extent for Cruyff.
 
CRUYFF 1974 VS MARADONA 1986

PLAYER, PASSES/GAMES = PASSES PER GAME
Cruyff , 332/7 = 47.4
Maradona, 262/7 = 37.4

PLAYER, SUCCESSFUL PASSES /PASSES = PASSING ACCURACY
Cruyff , 270/332 = 81.3%
Maradona = 209/262 =79.8%

PASSING ACCURACY OPP. HALF
Cruyff = 69.2%
Maradona = 67.6%

PLAYER, CHANCES CREATED /GAMES = CHANCES CREATED PER GAME
Cruyff , 36/7 = 5.1
Maradona, 27/7 = 3.9

These passing stats mean next to nothing really. I mean England defender Mick Mills (who?) had passing accuracy of 91% in the opposition half in the 1982 World Cup, which blows Diego and Johan out of the water. Sorry chaps - pass it like Mick next time. ;)

Not that I'd play down how brilliant Cruyff was (and Holland were) in 1974 - rate that tournament performance in the top handful of all time. But Diego's is king - and here are a few other stats worth sharing:

GOALS:
Maradona 5
Cruyff 3

ASSISTS
Maradona 5
Cruyff 3

FOULS SUFFERED
Maradona 53! (The next highest in World Cup history is Maradona himself in 1982 with 36 - and then the under-rated Uruguayan Cubilla with 32 in 1970)
Cruyff 30

DUELS WON
Maradona 122 (The next highest in World Cup history is 84)
Cruyff 73
 
@Jim Beam @Indnyc

Oh come one. The Maradona article is a bit over the top but it doesnt really take itself seriously on that level you seem to be taking. My only point in posting in good fun is that it does have stats and arguments that go against the often perception that Maradona is a one man unstoppable force in his trophy wins.

Not meant for title to be taken so literally. And Cruyff does get underrated in recent years in my opinion. I really dont think there is very much between Cruyff and Maradona historically at their peaks. Cruyff genius is a bit forgotten recently.

At least I wasn’t underestimating Cruyff. The statement that he is up there with Maradona and Pele as one of the all time best isn’t far fetched.

I would like to see how he would influence the game here and what weaknesses in the opposition can be exploited
 
Aye. And to be fair my comment had its origins in what Onenil said in the OP tactics - "Cruyff and Socrates will drop deep and 1-2 to eventually attack the space in between the back 3." Seems like a fairly central assignment to me.

If you interpret that comment as only being central then you must be expecting your back to be only defending centrally. Which would imply you're are relying on your wing backs to defend Ribery and Conti. This poses its own set of problems if the wing back backs are primarily responsible for defending the flanks and providing attacking width.
 
@Theon

How high a defensive line are you holding? Are you sitting back and hitting on the counter or are you being more proactive than that? Will both wingbacks attack at the same time?

@oneniltothearsenal

How high a defensive line are you holding and are Ribery and Conti tracking back to follow Marcelo and Cafu? Will they both do it at the same time or one at once?
 
General comment with regards stats. They are somewhat meaningless without context. e.g. if Argentina did concede so few goals you need to look at the average goals scored in the tournament to make a more informed assessment. It could be that it was a low scoring tournament in general
 
Koeman does stick out for me a bit. I rate him higher than others do, but this is not the kind of front 3 you would want him against.

Maldini too looks really under used at this stage with only Cafu to worry about on the right with a hard working Ribery already on that side too.

I am not sure who is on the bench, but think moving Maldini to the centre would have been a better idea in this game. I get the idea behind the philosophy and hence the Koeman pick, but this is just not the game he would shine in for me.

Scirea is a great addition. Should have been done at least a round earlier.

Going with Theon.
 
@Theon

How high a defensive line are you holding? Are you sitting back and hitting on the counter or are you being more proactive than that? Will both wingbacks attack at the same time?

@oneniltothearsenal

How high a defensive line are you holding and are Ribery and Conti tracking back to follow Marcelo and Cafu? Will they both do it at the same time or one at once?
My own take on the Juventus defence of the late 1970s and 1980s that Scirea led, the current Juventus defence of Chiellini and Barzagli, as well as the Argentina set-up of 1986 is that they all played fairly normal lines, erring slightly on the side of conservative. Therefore we would be looking at a similar approach here. And probably the key here given the opposition is ensuring we are compact in the central midfield and central defensive zone and we should have the personnel to execute that.
 
My own take on the Juventus defence of the late 1970s and 1980s that Scirea led, the current Juventus defence of Chiellini and Barzagli, as well as the Argentina set-up of 1986 is that they all played fairly normal lines, erring slightly on the side of conservative. Therefore we would be looking at a similar approach here. And probably the key here given the opposition is ensuring we are compact in the central midfield and central defensive zone and we should have the personnel to execute that.

Will Marcelo and Cafu bomb on at the same time? How possesion orientated are you trying to be?