Pat VS Downcast - NT peak draft

Who would win based on players in the peak from their chosen tournament?


  • Total voters
    23
  • Poll closed .
France-s-Just-Fontaine-in-007.jpg

Everybody on team Downcast react strongly, except Fontaine who is in the form of his life and knows he couldn't miss a penalty if he had to hit it from the half way line. He runs up towards the ball and strikes it with full power in to the centre of the goal. Chilavert goes right and is nowhere near catching that penalty. 1-1
 
Newb question, how are the outcome of the penalty kicks decided?

Each team sends in a list of 5 shots and saves. Just left right and centre. You choose from the players perspective, i.e a player shooting left, means the keeper going right is a save.
 
Each team sends in a list of 5 shots and saves. Just left right and centre. You choose from the players perspective, i.e a player shooting left, means the keeper going right is a save.
Thanks! Sounds fun.
 
Mario-Kempes-Valencia.jpeg

Kempes has wandered away in to his own world facing the supporters as he's called up by Pat to take the next penalty. This can only end in a disaster, he doesn't look focused at all. He puts the ball down, pukes, and makes his way back to prepare himself. 55.000 in the stadium are all quiet as he makes his way towards the ball, a powerful strike to the left, Mazurkiewicz goes to his left and Kempes celebrates like they had already won it. 2-1 Pat
 
The French natural penalty taker is up, Raymond Kopa. Downcast with full confidence in his Frenchman is focused on talking to the team instead of watching the inevitable goal that is about to come. He calmly runs up towards the ball, places it to his right and Chilavert goes the other way, again and the sexual tension is sparkling between Kopa and Downcast who are over themselves with joy. 2-2

5a98f7afeedc83365936154576969494.jpg
 
1200px-Soren_Lerby_1978c.jpg

Who will take the important third penalty for them? It seems like Søren Lerby is the man for the job. We know him as Pats Norwegian steel, will he also be his Norwegian ice? That's a hard face to read but I believe he's at least part angry. He runs up at full speed and curves it to his left. Mazurkiewicz reads that perfectly and gets the top of his finger on it to save it. 2-2
 
2004uk-0515-061d.jpg

Henry steps up for Downcast. Chilavert is staring him down and Henry quickly breaks eye contact and looks at the ball instead. A curled and powerful shot to left and Chilavert, stays in the middle and sees it soaring in. 2-3
 
hqdefault.jpg

Next up is Ghiggia. No wait, Chilavert is running towards him and pushes him away as he tries to redeem himself by taking the penalty. He looks furious and runs towards the spot and blasts it straight in the middle while Mazurkiewicz goes right. 3-3
 
frances-laurent-blanc-r-scores-a-penalty-past-italys-keeper-gianluca-GTDPDP.jpg

Downcast must be out of his mind. He's sending yet another Frenchman up, Laurent Blanc. Having a trusted core, or straight up racism, call it what you like but the people here in Stade August Delaune in Reims are going crazy for it. He jogs up, rolls it down the middle, and Chilavert goes left and completely misses yet another penalty. 3-4
 
ghiggia_2.jpg

Ghiggia finally gets to step up. Determined, nobody is going to steal this penalty from him. Pat couldn't rely on a better player than Ghiggia for such a crucial moment of the shoot-out. The man who steps up under pressure yet again has to show his cool. He steps up, jogs towards the ball, fakes a shot and Mazurkiewicz reads it perfectly and doesn't move an inch. But it doesn't matter as Ghiggia gets power on it to his right and scores. 4-4
 
article-2572224-00D504EF00000190-226_306x423.jpg

Downcast has ran out of Frenchmen and decides to send out Gunter Netzer who had a mixed performance. Magical going forward but the commentators has critiqued some of his defensive actions. If he scores here everything is forgotten and if he doesn't he can expect crap from Kicker tomorrow. He steps up, a wonderful curved ball to the left, searing towards the top corner with the pace of a butterfly. Chilavert goes left, but he has time to get up and make another stretch to the right but he just misses the ball. It's over. Chilavert has to be blamed for that. 4-5 Downcast wins
 
Last edited:
@Pat_Mustard

Commiserations.

You deserved to have Platini. I've won the last draft with Platini and also used the battle-midfield story-telling. I played against @Enigma_87 and traumatized him: instead of having someone like Vasovic as a #6, he now has Makélélé :wenger:

Rightful giving back.

Also, I said you had the wrong positioning regarding some players because I thought Nesta 2006 played in a 3-5-2 system or Lerby was a side-midfielder, which is false in hindsight.
 
Last edited:
Draw? Missed the finish here due to the early start. I was probably leaning ever so slightly to Pat on the basis that his team was tactically cleaner. Wasn't fully sold on the complementarity of Blanc/Khurt against the rugged bullying presence of Elkjaer, while Zito does look overworked in midfield with his hands full with Platini. That said, I think Downcast had the collective edge in player quality in midfield and attack, with Pat more focused - rightly - on piecing the correct bits of the Platini support act jigsaw.

Many think it can't work but - out of curiosity - why?
 
I see - that's fine. Potentially confusing «headline», though.

As for the match, I like both teams.

I like Pat's clear cut build around Platini. Proper use of a GOAT whose theme specific peak is beyond doubt (it's Maradona territory).

Then again, Downcast's team makes sense, largely, and features an impressive cast. If you buy Netzer in this set-up he could be devastating - decisive, even. His insane passes could be absolutely deadly here, with him having plenty of options to aim for.

Zito being somewhat stranded in certain possible scenarios is a worry, though. I buy Pat's basic point: a) Zito is the only credible man in that axis if we're talking high level defensive contribution. b) Kempes and Ghiggia will occupy Schnellinger and Andrade. c) Elkjaer will hassle the CBs, drag whoever tracks him around.

This is a good (not ideal in the sense that Downcast is fecked by any means - the pure numbers are still on his side) scenario for Platini. And Platini is the best player on the park - if we're talking draft theme, this is even more evident.

Anyway, not voting - I generally don't feel like voting in these GOATish affairs, usually seems to me that either side could nick it through some moment of magic or other. Too fantastic even for a fantasy match, etc.

Interesting. Cheers.

Platini MOTM obviously: he won with France.

Typical 'issue' is to compare players of the 50s with contemporary players.

If teams comprised of supposedly average players is capable to do miracles and beat great teams, it simple means any team that possess GOATs would win.

When I overthink, I don't vote so I try to take a decision quickly, which is not always a good thing in itself.
 
Many think it can't work but - out of curiosity - why?
Both probably shone best next to a more dynamic defender who excelled at attacking the first ball, such as Desailly for France. And perhaps more likely to be exploited by a physical front man who would relish that kind of opportunity. I think @Enigma_87 made the same point. Both well rounded though with excellent tournament credentials, so a minor point more than anything.
 
Both probably shone best next to a more dynamic defender who excelled at attacking the first ball, such as Desailly for France. And perhaps more likely to be exploited by a physical front man who would relish that kind of opportunity. I think @Enigma_87 made the same point. Both well rounded though with excellent tournament credentials, so a minor point more than anything.

Thanks for the answer. I thought Khurt would have been my Soviet Desailly.
 
When I overthink, I don't vote so I try to take a decision quickly, which is not always a good thing in itself

Well, I generally find it more interesting to look at individual players, or particular combinations, or some minor point or other - rather than trying to figure out who would win.

In these GOAT fests it doesn't seem all that important which team gets sent through.
 
Well, I generally find it more interesting to look at individual players, or particular combinations, or some minor point or other - rather than trying to figure out who would win.

In these GOAT fests it doesn't seem all that important which team gets sent through.

Indeed.

When I expect a game to be tight, I tend to reward the strategy/'philosophy'/story I like.
 
@Pat_Mustard

Commiserations.

You deserved to have Platini. I've won the last draft with Platini and also used the battle-midfield story-telling. I played against @Enigma_87 and traumatized him: instead of having someone like Vasovic as a #6, he now has Makélélé :wenger:

Rightful giving back.

Also, I said you had the wrong positioning regarding some players because I thought Nesta 2006 played in a 3-5-2 system or Lerby was a side-midfielder, which is false in hindsight.
Facing you on penos is like facing zee Germans :D Well done mate, you have an excellent team.

Commiserations @Pat_Mustard have to say you were my favorite from the first picks as you were dead on to the theme.

Both probably shone best next to a more dynamic defender who excelled at attacking the first ball, such as Desailly for France. And perhaps more likely to be exploited by a physical front man who would relish that kind of opportunity. I think @Enigma_87 made the same point. Both well rounded though with excellent tournament credentials, so a minor point more than anything.


Yeah agree. Depends on who he wants to keep going forward - Khurtsilava or Blanc, but a Desailly/Kohler next to them would be more balanced IMO.
 
Facing you on penos is like facing zee Germans :D Well done mate, you have an excellent team.

Commiserations @Pat_Mustard have to say you were my favorite from the first picks as you were dead on to the theme.




Yeah agree. Depends on who he wants to keep going forward - Khurtsilava or Blanc, but a Desailly/Kohler next to them would be more balanced IMO.

1. Thanks! I kept the same choice regarding the penalty-taker and GK that I used against you :D What I call a proven penalty strategy.
2. Desailly and Kohler: :drool:

I only take new players I've never picked in a draft so I can't pick Kohler if he is available
 
As usual, I thank all the voters and contributors. Hopefully, we will see new contributors in the next drafts.

This game was also a tribute to Raymond Kopa (1931-2017) who died last month. RIP

JhYIN3K.jpg








You can see below Fiorentino Perez, Fontaine, Santamaria...

 
Raymond Kopa: The First Modern Footballer
March 6, 2017 Jeremy Smith Leave a comment
Kopa-700x300.png

Ask any French football fan to name the three best players in France’s history and they should all provide you with the same three names, the only issue up for debate being their ranking. Answers given will likely fall into generational categories: while the younger respondents may place Zinedine Zidane as the best, with the next age-group up preferring Michel Platini, those of an older generation will name, as their number one, Raymond Kopa.

Like his two illustrious successors, Raymond Kopa was no stranger to controversy. But also like Platini and Zidane, his footballing talent transcended his generation. Not only that but his influence off the pitch arguably made him the first modern footballer, paving the way for Platoche, Zizou and others to benefit financially from their talent.

Born Raymond Kopaczewski (the shortened version used by his first team-mates quickly stuck), Kopa was the son of Polish immigrants. Again like Platini and Zidane after him, both also the sons of newcomers welcomed to France, Kopa served as a great advert for what can be achieved by France when it is welcoming to outsiders – an important message in today’s worrying climate.

Raised in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais region, Kopa struggled at school and, at only 14, followed his father into the local mines, working 600 metres underground and losing a finger in a work accident. Like so many footballing greats before and since, football proved the youngster’s way out (he himself acknowledged that, had he been born into a middle-class family, he would not have had the same desire and dedication to succeed) and, after impressing in a local talent competition, Kopa joined SCO Angers, making his debut aged 17. Even this first transfer caused some bad blood – not least with Kopa himself: the president of Kopa’s amateur club at Noeux-les-Mines, who publicly criticised him for moving “after all we’d done for him”, happened also to be an engineer at the mine in which Kopa injured himself, and could have assigned him to a much safer position.

The skillful attacker’s performances impressed sufficiently to attract the attention of France’s best team of the time, Stade de Reims, who moved for the youngster in another protracted deal as the clubs argued over the price and Kopa himself insisted on a higher signing-on fee.

Under the great French coach Albert Batteux, with whom Kopa lodged when he first moved to Reims, the youngster flourished, thriving under his mentor’s encouragement to give free rein to his offensive abilities in a new withdrawn striker’s role. Kopa led Reims to the league championship in 1953 and 1955, before the club’s champagne football led them to the inaugural European Cup final in 1956, Reims losing 4-3 to Real Madrid at the Parc des Princes. Kopa himself was diminished due to an ankle injury – he played to avoid suggestions that he missed the match so as not to upset his future employers.



That summer, amid more controversy, Kopa became the first French player to make a move abroad, joining the original Galactico project at Real Madrid and, in his words, leaving the second best team in Europe to join the best team of all time. To give an idea of the size of the transfer fee (just under €1 million in today’s money), Reims used the funds to sign arguably the three next best French players of the time: Roger Piantoni, Jean Vincent and Just Fontaine.

Real had in fact been after Kopa since 1955, following a match which really put the youngster on the world stage…

Having had to wait until he was 21 to qualify to play for France, Kopa had become an international regular – although courting criticism in some parts for his tendency to over-dribble: a Miroir-Sprint editorial in defence of Kopa after he took much of the flak from “the chauvinists, the idiots and the incompetents” for France’s early exit from the 1954 World Cup reminded everyone of Kopa’s great two years on the national and international stage – including comparisons with Stanley Matthews – and condemned criticism as “symptomatic of the extraordinary confusion that reigns in the brains of certain pseudo-technicians”.

Under Batteux he retained his place, but as the day of a friendly against Spain at Real’s old Chamartin ground dawned, French journalist and selector Gabriel Hanot announced that “a four-goal defeat for France would be normal, a victory impossible”. Kopa had other ideas, scoring one and helping create the other as France won 2-1 in front of a crowd of 125,000, prompting British journalist Desmond Hackett to describe the diminutive playmaker (Kopa was only 5’6” – the same height as another brilliant dribbler, Messi) as the Napoleon of football, saying “this afternoon I witnessed one of the greatest footballers of all time”.



Kopa remained at Real Madrid for three years, playing with the likes of Gento, Di Stefano and later his idol Ferenc Puskas. Exiled to the right wing (Di Stefano, the undisputed alpha male of the team, insisted on this after Kopa’s four goals in his first two games threatened his status), Kopa was an essential part of a team that lost only once in three years, winning two league titles and three European Cups.

Undoubtedly, 1958 was Kopa’s zenith as a footballer. With the league title and the European Cup in the bank, international challenges beckoned as Kopa travelled to Sweden with the France squad. Again, controversy was not far away: Real would not free their foreigners to play internationals so Kopa had not appeared for les Bleus for two years. Many said that he should therefore not be part of the World Cup squad; his cause was helped by France’s poor form coming into the tournament – as well as having the support of the France coach, Batteux, and the selector Paul Nicolas.

Just Fontaine and his 13 goals will ensure that he forever remains a staple of sports quizzes worldwide. But it was his deeper-lying partner up front, with whom he roomed and formed an almost telepathic relationship, who pulled the strings, beat defenders for fun and provided the millimetered passes as France brilliantly finished in third place. Named the player of a tournament which was won by a Brazil featuring Didi, Pele and Garrincha, Kopa won plaudits the world over and helped put France on the map as an international team.

France lost 5-2 to Brazil in the semi-final, severely handicapped by captain and centre-back Robert Jonquet breaking his leg, half an hour in, with the score at 1-1, Kopa having set up Fontaine for an equaliser: no substitutes were allowed at the time so Jonquet spent the last hour as a passenger on the left wing as Pele ran riot and left everyone wondering what might have been. However, a 6-3 win over West Germany in the third place play-off made the France team – especially Fontaine and Kopa – household names back home. As the icing on the cake, Kopa – who finished in the top three for four straight years – became the first Frenchman to win the Ballon d’Or, again paving the way for Platini and Zidane (as well as Jean-Pierre Papin).


After his third season at Real – which ended with another European Cup final victory over Reims – Kopa’s next move again was controversial. Real expected him to sign a five year contract extension; however, Kopa was mindful that he needed to begin to think of life after football and take care of his and his family’s financial security. He therefore returned to Reims, to enable him also to look after his business interests. Way ahead of his time, he developed the Kopa mark – covering products from clothing to fruit juices – and setting a template for future stars to benefit from their notoriety.

On the pitch success continued as Kopa won two more French league titles with Reims. But he was increasingly making news off the pitch as well as on it. In 1963 he turned his attention to players’ rights: at the time players were effectively contracted to their clubs for life and subject to the whims of their chairmen. Kopa railed against this and earned himself a suspended six-month ban by declaring that “footballers are slaves”. His influence and support empowered the UNFP players’ union, established by his friend Fontaine, which eventually secured contract rights for professional players.

1963 proved a tumultuous year for Kopa. In February he had already retired from international football after a dispute with France coach Georges Verriest, who publicly criticised him for not joining the squad for a week’s training session: Verriest had backtracked after giving Kopa leave – the reason for that leave being that Kopa was caring for his son, who tragically died of cancer, aged just four.

With Kopa aging and understandably distracted, Reims were relegated in 1964 but, showing loyalty to the club, he remained despite attractive offers elsewhere, to help them to immediate promotion.

Kopa finally retired in 1967, aged 35. Continuing to play football for fun, he was tempted back in 1973, aged 41, to play for PSG in a pre-season friendly, as a favour to then-PSG coach Fontaine. Amazingly Kopa scored a hat-trick and had to resist offers to join the club, instead focussing on his business interests and driving 80,000km per year as sales director of the Kopa brand. Eventually retiring to divide his time between his homes in Angers and Corsica, Kopa passed away last week at the age of 85.

The outpouring of love at the news of Kopa’s passing – not only in France but also abroad and most notably at Real Madrid – are a testament to the mark that he left on football. In France in particular, the footballing landscape both on and off the pitch – and the success that so many French players have enjoyed – would not have been possible had it not been for the Napoleon of football.



Kopa - Platini - Zidane
 
@Pat_Mustard

Commiserations.

You deserved to have Platini. I've won the last draft with Platini and also used the battle-midfield story-telling. I played against @Enigma_87 and traumatized him: instead of having someone like Vasovic as a #6, he now has Makélélé :wenger:

Rightful giving back.

Also, I said you had the wrong positioning regarding some players because I thought Nesta 2006 played in a 3-5-2 system or Lerby was a side-midfielder, which is false in hindsight.

Cheers mate! Congrats and good luck going forward. You have a great team and you've been one of the best drafters in terms of actually picking players based on tournament peaks - the likes of Blanc, Kopa, Netzer and Fontaine deserve huge credit here.

Facing you on penos is like facing zee Germans :D Well done mate, you have an excellent team.

Commiserations @Pat_Mustard have to say you were my favorite from the first picks as you were dead on to the theme.

Thanks mate. I did try to engage with the tournament peak thing as best I could, and I hope I did a decent job in building around Platini.
 
Cheers mate! Congrats and good luck going forward. You have a great team and you've been one of the best drafters in terms of actually picking players based on tournament peaks - the likes of Blanc, Kopa, Netzer and Fontaine deserve huge credit here.



Thanks mate. I did try to engage with the tournament peak thing as best I could, and I hope I did a decent job in building around Platini.

Bar following the exact blueprint of a Platini side, you did about as good of a job as one can do! Great side as well.
 
Cheers mate! Congrats and good luck going forward. You have a great team and you've been one of the best drafters in terms of actually picking players based on tournament peaks - the likes of Blanc, Kopa, Netzer and Fontaine deserve huge credit here.



Thanks mate. I did try to engage with the tournament peak thing as best I could, and I hope I did a decent job in building around Platini.

Thanks. :)

You team great but I have to admit I've understood lately your strategy with Lerby-Kempes that would have worked well like the partnership Kempes-Ortiz did in 78.

I can be 'provocative' but I think I have respected your players on the whole :)

Who would have been your next picks/priorities if you had won that game?
 
Cheers mate! Congrats and good luck going forward. You have a great team and you've been one of the best drafters in terms of actually picking players based on tournament peaks - the likes of Blanc, Kopa, Netzer and Fontaine deserve huge credit here.
This. You had lots of personal favourites but Downcast had a great collection of performers and used them in a way that better suited them IMO.
 
Bar following the exact blueprint of a Platini side, you did about as good of a job as one can do! Great side as well.

Cheers mate :)

Thanks. :)

You team great but I have to admit I've understood lately your strategy with Lerby-Kempes that would have worked well like the partnership Kempes-Ortiz did in 78.

I can be 'provocative' but I think I have respected your players on the whole :)

Who would have been your next picks/priorities if you had won that game?

:lol: I think we both had our provocative moments but a bit of feistiness livens these match threads up. We both had plenty of compliments for the other team's players in amongst our differences of opinion ;).

Funny enough, I really fancied Beckenbauer in the reinforcement round if I had made it through. I hadn't thought about it carefully but a Magic Square with 1966 Beckenbauer in the Tigana role could have been great. I find Platini very difficult to build a team around as few of the most prominent GOATs fit clearly alongside him, but I think Beckenbauer and Platini would be great.

This. You had lots of personal favourites but Downcast had a great collection of performers and used them in a way that better suited them IMO.

Out of interest, would you have preferred a Magic Square variant to my actual line up? I was toying with either:

1579989_Stade_de_Reims.jpg


or

1579993_Stade_de_Reims.jpg


I decided against the bottom one as Kempes himself stated that he started WC '78 poorly as he was played to close to goal, but I somewhat regret not playing the one with Schiaffino and Elkjaer up front.
 
Out of interest, would you have preferred a Magic Square variant to my actual line up? I was toying with either:

1579989_Stade_de_Reims.jpg


or

1579993_Stade_de_Reims.jpg


I decided against the bottom one as Kempes himself stated that he started WC '78 poorly as he was played to close to goal, but I somewhat regret not playing the one with Schiaffino and Elkjaer up front.

Yeah, my problem with your side was it should have been built to deliver Platini's peak performance so you had to go with the carré magique, absolutely.

The problem then is completing the other parts. Fernández obviously is perfect, as is Lerby (although at that point you create a constraint, more on this later), but the other guy has to be a Giresse type. Someone like, well, Giresse, or Iniesta... the one with Hässler works better than with Kempes, no question. Not just because Kempes is a misfit but because the moment you have Lerby left the guy ahead of him must be Platini (think about the square rotating into a diamond, Fernández should be deepest and Platini up top).

Then move on to the forwards:

  • One was a wingforward played upfront (Six, Rocheteau, Bellone). They were tricky players with pace to burn making incisive runs on either side, so not really Kempes or Schiaffino. I could see Elkjaer doing that but it's a very disciplined and selfless role designed to bring width and movement for others (particularly Platini) to exploit the gaps and shine. Basically, I would have the same issue with Elkjaer as I would with Stoichkov: can do the role but you would have too great a player who was more than is being asked of him. Rep 78 or Rensenbrink 74 would be better picks IMO (in terms of tactical purity, not vote-winning).
  • The other was a centreforward (Lacombe, Stopyra) who, again, played a second fiddle tactical role. You don't hire Müller or van Basten for that, you hire someone like Seeler who will play for Platini. I think Elkjaer would work better in this role than the defence-stretching width one.
By now you may be wondering "well, if I get a lot of selfless players playing for Platini it's no wonder he did so well!". Well, precisely, it was wonderful and unplayable, but in a draft your team wouldn't be rated that highly. Unfortunately that's how it works.

You then have a further problem with your fullbacks, Thuram specifically. France had a great set of fullbacks who could defend or attack and play either side. Thuram can go forward, but he doesn't exactly afford you the flexibility of Bossis and Amoros as options (on top of Domergue and others).

The point is recreating the brilliance of the carré magique is not easily done. Firstly, you need Platini, but then the entire side really ends up revolving around that pick. What was stunning about it also was how easily they could switch to approach different games and exploit specific weaknesses. Amoros (more adept at going all the way attacking) and Bossis (more capable as a wide playmaker) could switch sides. So could Tigana, as opposed to Lerby here, so the square rotated with Tigana left and Giresse right or viceversa, as required. Then the WF guy upfront could change based on opponent or form. Effectively, they could choose to be more creative on one side and more incisive in the other, and viceversa, they just moved their pieces. In all scenarios what you had was a team deployed to stretch defences with its movement and create the gaps for Platini to steal in as false 9.

That to me is what set it apart from the Brazil 82 one. Eder was the forward pulling wide, the much-maligned Sergio the CF, Zico was Platini, Socrates was a samba version of Giresse, Falcao was Tigana, Cerezo a Fernández with better playmaking and worse defending. Junior was Bossis and Leandro was Amoros, but they too were worse defenders and couldn't switch sides, which meant the midfield couldn't be switched, which in turn meant Eder was nailed on to start and peel wide to make space for Zico.

This made things more predictable and games easier to prepare for as you knew exactly (minus the flair) how Brazil would go about the game. It was the same basic idea but much more rigid, less able to adapt to the rival's strengths and weaknesses, and poorer defensively. It may have had more pizzazz at times, but it wasn't as strong a side as France.
 
@Pat_Mustard I like your square with Hassler in it. Really nice. Thought he was a really apt fit both for Giresse and for a narrow formation that requires an easy injection of width every now and then. Agree with @antohan's take on it all, the issue was partly the full-back (but Battiston is arguably no better going forward than Thuram and performed a function well at times), but moreso the strikers and the blend with Kempes in particular (a selfless in-to-out rather than a glory-hunting out-to-in). Not much of a pool though for that gig in this rarefied company, perhaps an Henry, Robben, Rivaldo or Eder type, or Rep as anto suggested on the other side.

Edit - just realised that Platini, Elkjaer, Kempes and Rep all played in my 50s side.
 
@Pat_Mustard I like your square with Hassler in it. Really nice. Thought he was a really apt fit both for Giresse and for a narrow formation that requires an easy injection of width every now and then. Agree with @antohan's take on it all, the issue was partly the full-back (but Battiston is arguably no better going forward than Thuram and performed a function well at times), but moreso the strikers and the blend with Kempes in particular (a selfless in-to-out rather than a glory-hunting out-to-in). Not much of a pool though for that gig in this rarefied company, perhaps an Henry, Robben, Rivaldo or Eder type, or Rep as anto suggested on the other side.

Edit - just realised that Platini, Elkjaer, Kempes and Rep all played in my 50s side.

Struck down by Il bello di notte :p Then picked Platini and Elkjaer, thank you very much.

Should have gone on to win the final, shame I chickened out of going with my gut on the initial formation (I thought people wouldn't get it :annoyed:).
 
Cheers mate :)



:lol: I think we both had our provocative moments but a bit of feistiness livens these match threads up. We both had plenty of compliments for the other team's players in amongst our differences of opinion ;).

Funny enough, I really fancied Beckenbauer in the reinforcement round if I had made it through. I hadn't thought about it carefully but a Magic Square with 1966 Beckenbauer in the Tigana role could have been great. I find Platini very difficult to build a team around as few of the most prominent GOATs fit clearly alongside him, but I think Beckenbauer and Platini would be great.
.

Perfect. Beckenbauer for the 1st pick, who for the 2nd pick?
 
Funny enough, I really fancied Beckenbauer in the reinforcement round if I had made it through. I hadn't thought about it carefully but a Magic Square with 1966 Beckenbauer in the Tigana role could have been great. I find Platini very difficult to build a team around as few of the most prominent GOATs fit clearly alongside him, but I think Beckenbauer and Platini would be great.

Indeed. However, I had Pele and Platini in mind for potential future reinforcements when building my side. I think a magic square of Voronin-Falcao-Platini-Charlton with Rummenigge and Careca could have worked quite nicely. Likewise a 1970-esque side with Falcao-Voronin ; Charlton-Pele-Rummenigge with Careca up front. Tbf, it was a fairly accommodating set-up which would have allowed most #10s and SS to fit in.
 
Yeah, my problem with your side was it should have been built to deliver Platini's peak performance so you had to go with the carré magique, absolutely.

The problem then is completing the other parts. Fernández obviously is perfect, as is Lerby (although at that point you create a constraint, more on this later), but the other guy has to be a Giresse type. Someone like, well, Giresse, or Iniesta... the one with Hässler works better than with Kempes, no question. Not just because Kempes is a misfit but because the moment you have Lerby left the guy ahead of him must be Platini (think about the square rotating into a diamond, Fernández should be deepest and Platini up top).

Then move on to the forwards:

  • One was a wingforward played upfront (Six, Rocheteau, Bellone). They were tricky players with pace to burn making incisive runs on either side, so not really Kempes or Schiaffino. I could see Elkjaer doing that but it's a very disciplined and selfless role designed to bring width and movement for others (particularly Platini) to exploit the gaps and shine. Basically, I would have the same issue with Elkjaer as I would with Stoichkov: can do the role but you would have too great a player who was more than is being asked of him. Rep 78 or Rensenbrink 74 would be better picks IMO (in terms of tactical purity, not vote-winning).
  • The other was a centreforward (Lacombe, Stopyra) who, again, played a second fiddle tactical role. You don't hire Müller or van Basten for that, you hire someone like Seeler who will play for Platini. I think Elkjaer would work better in this role than the defence-stretching width one.
By now you may be wondering "well, if I get a lot of selfless players playing for Platini it's no wonder he did so well!". Well, precisely, it was wonderful and unplayable, but in a draft your team wouldn't be rated that highly. Unfortunately that's how it works.

You then have a further problem with your fullbacks, Thuram specifically. France had a great set of fullbacks who could defend or attack and play either side. Thuram can go forward, but he doesn't exactly afford you the flexibility of Bossis and Amoros as options (on top of Domergue and others).

The point is recreating the brilliance of the carré magique is not easily done. Firstly, you need Platini, but then the entire side really ends up revolving around that pick. What was stunning about it also was how easily they could switch to approach different games and exploit specific weaknesses. Amoros (more adept at going all the way attacking) and Bossis (more capable as a wide playmaker) could switch sides. So could Tigana, as opposed to Lerby here, so the square rotated with Tigana left and Giresse right or viceversa, as required. Then the WF guy upfront could change based on opponent or form. Effectively, they could choose to be more creative on one side and more incisive in the other, and viceversa, they just moved their pieces. In all scenarios what you had was a team deployed to stretch defences with its movement and create the gaps for Platini to steal in as false 9.

That to me is what set it apart from the Brazil 82 one. Eder was the forward pulling wide, the much-maligned Sergio the CF, Zico was Platini, Socrates was a samba version of Giresse, Falcao was Tigana, Cerezo a Fernández with better playmaking and worse defending. Junior was Bossis and Leandro was Amoros, but they too were worse defenders and couldn't switch sides, which meant the midfield couldn't be switched, which in turn meant Eder was nailed on to start and peel wide to make space for Zico.

This made things more predictable and games easier to prepare for as you knew exactly (minus the flair) how Brazil would go about the game. It was the same basic idea but much more rigid, less able to adapt to the rival's strengths and weaknesses, and poorer defensively. It may have had more pizzazz at times, but it wasn't as strong a side as France.

Sorry, barely been online for a few days but that's a cracking post Anto. That's about as good an explanation of the mechanics of that France team as I've ever read, and a banker for this draft info mega thread we've been talking about. A few points, just to explain where I was coming from with my selections.

I was reluctant to go with a Magic Square partly because they're such a bastard to get right, and also because I'm not entirely convinced that the specific formation was essential to Platini's performance level in that tournament - it was slap bang in the middle of his triple Ballon d'Or winning peak, so he was as effective in the Zona Mista for one. Also at least some of the selections were forced on Hidalgo rather than ingenious tactical choices eg; Amoros sending off and suspension at the Euros, and more generally the glut of great midfielders and comparative paucity of top-notch attackers.

For me, the main requirements for peak Platini were:

1) He has to be the main playmaker: I think I nailed this one okay. He had other good passers around him, but no one who could be deemed a dominant playmaker.

2) Hardworking base: Again fine - Fernandez/Lerby are fine as surrogates for Fernandez/Tigana and Bonini/Tardelli

3) Forwards who will create space for him and complement him stylistically: This is where things got muddy and I probably dropped the ball.

Elkjaer is good: bare in mind I was thinking more in a generic 'CF creating space for midfield runners' sense than a remake deal. Drogba/Lampard, Torres/Gerrard etc.

Ghiggia: Again, I'm happy enough in principle with an orthodox winger providing the width - for me the important thing is that the opposition defence can't stay compact, not the exact manner in which the width is provided. We've seen plenty of other goalscoring AMs find plenty of space as a result of wingers stretching the play eg; earlier career Scholes.

Kempes: Not as good a fit as I first thought. I wanted him as soon as I read the draft criteria so I was always going to play him, but it wasn't the clean fit I hoped for. He ticked quite a few boxes: not a competing playmaker, shares a high-tempo style of play with Platini. I saw similarities with Boniek in terms of their Duracell bunny running and manic energy levels, but in retrospect Kempes did too much of his best work on the ball rather than with off the ball movement for it to be ideal.

All in all, I think it was a good team, but possibly neither fish nor fowl to borrow @Chesterlestreet 's great phrase. Not a clean remake of a Platini system, and a bit amorphous and assymetrical to readily associate it with another clear style of play.
 
Perfect. Beckenbauer for the 1st pick, who for the 2nd pick?

I had no idea mate. If Brehme had been available I'd have taken him and gladly stuck with a Thuram-McGrath-Cannavaro-Brehme defence until the very end. Djazic would have been great as a wide attacker but he wasn't available either.
 
Indeed. However, I had Pele and Platini in mind for potential future reinforcements when building my side. I think a magic square of Voronin-Falcao-Platini-Charlton with Rummenigge and Careca could have worked quite nicely. Likewise a 1970-esque side with Falcao-Voronin ; Charlton-Pele-Rummenigge with Careca up front. Tbf, it was a fairly accommodating set-up which would have allowed most #10s and SS to fit in.

That would have made for a nifty Magic Square indeed, with Charlton's dribbling and ability to provide width replicating Giresse's attributes whilst being a big upgrade in terms of individual quality. The front pairing looks ideal too, although typically with a Platini team in a draft Careca might pose problems later on - a great fit, but maybe not seen as final-worthy, and difficult to upgrade.
 
Sorry, barely been online for a few days but that's a cracking post Anto. That's about as good an explanation of the mechanics of that France team as I've ever read, and a banker for this draft info mega thread we've been talking about. A few points, just to explain where I was coming from with my selections.

I was reluctant to go with a Magic Square partly because they're such a bastard to get right, and also because I'm not entirely convinced that the specific formation was essential to Platini's performance level in that tournament - it was slap bang in the middle of his triple Ballon d'Or winning peak, so he was as effective in the Zona Mista for one. Also at least some of the selections were forced on Hidalgo rather than ingenious tactical choices eg; Amoros sending off and suspension at the Euros, and more generally the glut of great midfielders and comparative paucity of top-notch attackers.

For me, the main requirements for peak Platini were:

1) He has to be the main playmaker: I think I nailed this one okay. He had other good passers around him, but no one who could be deemed a dominant playmaker.

2) Hardworking base: Again fine - Fernandez/Lerby are fine as surrogates for Fernandez/Tigana and Bonini/Tardelli

3) Forwards who will create space for him and complement him stylistically: This is where things got muddy and I probably dropped the ball.

Elkjaer is good: bare in mind I was thinking more in a generic 'CF creating space for midfield runners' sense than a remake deal. Drogba/Lampard, Torres/Gerrard etc.

Ghiggia: Again, I'm happy enough in principle with an orthodox winger providing the width - for me the important thing is that the opposition defence can't stay compact, not the exact manner in which the width is provided. We've seen plenty of other goalscoring AMs find plenty of space as a result of wingers stretching the play eg; earlier career Scholes.

Kempes: Not as good a fit as I first thought. I wanted him as soon as I read the draft criteria so I was always going to play him, but it wasn't the clean fit I hoped for. He ticked quite a few boxes: not a competing playmaker, shares a high-tempo style of play with Platini. I saw similarities with Boniek in terms of their Duracell bunny running and manic energy levels, but in retrospect Kempes did too much of his best work on the ball rather than with off the ball movement for it to be ideal.

All in all, I think it was a good team, but possibly neither fish nor fowl to borrow @Chesterlestreet 's great phrase. Not a clean remake of a Platini system, and a bit amorphous and assymetrical to readily associate it with another clear style of play.

That's it in a nutshell. It wasn't the magic square but it wasn't Juve either. The key with Platini is the off-the-ball movement of the forwards ahead creating the space for him to steal in (picture it as them pulling the labia for the coq to go in) and their ability to roam across the frontline for him to play them through from deep.

Ghiggia stretched the defence, but occupies a space the CFs then can't/shouldn't drop into (as opposed to how Boniek was nominally in that position but often elsewhere).

Kempes was working the inside left into the box and that left Elkjaer and, by extension, Platini a bit crammed in the centre.

With your personnel I would have dropped Ghiggia, used the square with Hassler in it (well capable of going off on one down the right wing) and played Schiaffino and Elkjaer upfront (with Schiaffino likely dropping inside left or Elkjaer peeling right to stretch the defence or roaming as the line leader for passes from deep).