R1 Pardew Draft: MichaelF7 vs Pat_Mustard

[Physiocrat]

MichaelF7

Pat_Mustard

MichaelF7 Tactics

My team will be playing a 4-4-2 formation based on the tactics of Arrigo Sacchi which means a lot of pressing and moving the ball into the final third quickly after winning it. Before describing some of the less commonly drafted players in my team I will firstly justify the formation based on a quote from this opening post written by @GodShaveTheQueen in a draft we managed in together in 2019:

Managers that pick Matthaus as the first pick don't often win the draft and there is a very good reason for that. They don't try to get the best out of their marquee player. The best way to build a draft team in our opinion is to build it around the best player in your team and maximize his influence on the setup. Sounds obvious and easy to do with the likes of Maradona or Di Stefano or Baresi or Beckenbauer. Not so much with the likes of Matthaus and Rijkaard. The most usual misuse of course is to shoehorn Lothar into a double pivot and place a pure No.10 ahead of him with of course the eventual hope of replacing him with a GOAT No.10 in reinforcements. That more or less converts Matthaus into a minor upgrade over players like Davids/Tigana/Keane etc. Someone who could provide a base for the playmaker ahead of him to shine. But Matthaus of course was so much better than that and offers way more than any of them listed earlier. One simply needs to use him in the right setup around the right set of players who rather than limit his game, make use of his skills both on and off the ball to the maximum.

@GodShaveTheQueen went on to state that he believed that this formation got the best out of Matthaus both on attack and on defense.

Now onto some of the less commonly drafted players in my XI:

Christian Panucci played in a similar formation under Capello at AC Milan being a regular RB in his last 2 half seasons at the club and winning 2 Serie A titles and a Champions League. In 1994 he was chosen by Italian magazine Guerin Sportivo as the best young footballer (21 and under) in Europe. Panucci then spent a further 1 and a half seasons in top form at Real Madrid winning a La Liga and Champions League. Panucci was comfortable in possession with high work rate and consistency as well as being athletically capable.

Chris Waddle was an English winger/attacking midfielder who could play on both sides. He was in the PFA 1st division team of the year twice in 1984-85 and 1988-89 before being the Football Writers Footballer of the Year in England for the 1992-93 season. Between 1989 and 1992 Waddle spent 3 seasons at Marseille where in 1991 he was voted by readers of French newspaper Onze Mondial as the 2nd best footballer in Europe. In 1998 he was voted as the 2nd best player in Marseille's history and in 2010 was included in Marseille's greatest ever XI

Robert Pires was in the PFA team of the year for three consecutive seasons at Arsenal between the 01/02 and 03/04 seasons being the Football Writers Footballer of the Year in England in the first of those 3 seasons. Pires topped the assist charts in the Premier League in the 01/02 Season while scoring 14+ goals for Arsenal in all competitions for 4 consecutive seasons between 01/02 and 04/05.

George Weah the 1995 Ballon d'Or winner also won the FIFA World Player of the Year award in 1995 finishing 2nd the following year (award voted on by national team coaches). In 2013 Franco Baresi included him in the best XI he has played with. My opponent in this match Thierry Henry compared Weah to R9 and Romario saying the following:

The following video shows Weah's best goals during his time in Serie A.



Pat_Mustard Tactics

My pool dictated that the team was always going to be strongly influenced by Wenger's excellent Arsenal teams of the late 90s/early 00s. I considered fielding a three-man midfield, with Gilberto as the holder, for better control and defensive solidity. Ultimately though, I couldn't resist staying true to the swashbucking nature of those teams and going with the cavalier 4-2-3-1, particularly as the opposition will probably play a similar formation and we won't be outnumbered in central midfield.

This team has more in common with the Invincibles than the 1997/98 Double winners in terms of personnel and particularly shape, with the movement patterns on the left wing. There's nods to the earlier team as well though, with van Hanegem/Vieira looking somewhat similar to Petit/Vieira, and Overmars being selected as a blisteringly fast and direct winger.

Those Arsenal teams were irrepressible domestically but underachieved in Europe relative to their ability, so to that end we've injected both quality and leadership in several key positions:

• Cech as an upgrade to Seaman/Lehmann.
• Koeman's immense passing ability will be a serious asset to a team that relies on fast, surgical transitions. Buttressed by Campbell and Thuram, we've mitigated for his defensive flaws well too.
• A bona fide defensive great in Thuram will be a vital element in damage control in what is by my own admission quite an open and cavalier system. With a 1v1 specialist like Overmars ahead of him, he can generally be fairly conservative in his positioning to help our defensive transition.
• The pugnacious van Hanegem adds greater class and control in possession than either Gilberto or Petit did, while retaining much of their ball-winning abilities. Moreover, he's proven himself as a terrific foil to our star player, and one who was happy to play a more restrained role for the greater good of the team.
• Most significantly of all, Cruyff provides genuine GOAT-level quality, leadership and self-belief to a team that tended to fall short at the highest level. I generally wouldn't view playing on the left in a 4-2-3-1 as an ideal use for him, but given the rest of the pieces in play it seems to fit him to a tee here. He can replicate and better the influential Pires in every aspect as a roaming playmaker from that position, and he should love Henry's trademark centre-to-left movements. Bergkamp should be a complementary partner too: brilliant at dropping off to receive the ball with his back to goal and releasing it quickly and accurately, and a wonderfully incisive and generous assister as well.

Mike's Redondo/Matthaus midfield pairing is stupendous and is a viable means for him to exert control of the match. I'd back van Hanegem/Vieira to avoid getting overwhelmed though, and I feel we have the greater cutting edge in attack that should win the match for us. Panucci will likely struggle against our Cole/Cruyff/Henry left wing carousel, and I'm not entirely sold on Tresor's credentials against this sort of attack either. Brehme is brilliant, but he wasn't particularly quick and could struggle with Overmars in direct 1v1s on occasion.

 

[Physiocrat]

@Michaelf7777777 @Pat_Mustard

Game on!

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Absolutely even teams

 

[Šjor Bepo]

not sure whats more tragic, mike building his team based on scrappy(or anyone from here) quote or cruyff acting as fecking pires

 

[Physiocrat]

Why do loads of goal comp videos have a ridiculous number of replays?

 

[Physiocrat]

On Matthaus I have always thought he would be best in a 433.

Nedved.....Matthaus
...........Voronin...............

He can play his two way game and be the dominant guy in the midfield.

 

[The Red Viper]

Feel like Pat will win ultimately because he has too much quality and that will end up helping him in the end.

But if I were in his position, I would have just played a RWB instead of Overmars.

That would have set his team up so much better and put all his best players in roles/positions where they would have been able to maximize their ability to the fullest.

You retain the Henry and Bergkamp partnership and have Cruyff in a free role behind those two.

Koeman in a back-5 to hide his lack of pace but he would have had the license to march forward lot more in a back-5. And you also wouldn't really have needed a proper holder in a 5-2-1-2 set-up and both Vieira and Van Hanegem could have made more runs from midfield.

 

[The Red Viper]

On Matthaus I have always thought he would be best in a 433.

Nedved.....Matthaus
...........Voronin...............

He can play his two way game and be the dominant guy in the midfield.

Ideally, yes.

But since we are playing in drafts are there are far more elite no 10s than elite CMs, majority use him behind a proper no 10. And considering how great and complete Lothar was, he would still be the most dominant central midfielder on the pitch anyway. I don't think its an issue. And especially alongside Redondo, its the perfect partnership.

 

[Physiocrat]

Feel like Pat will win ultimately because he has too much quality and that will end up helping him in the end.

But if I were in his position, I would have just played a RWB instead of Overmars.

That would have set his team up so much better and put all his best players in roles/positions where they would have been able to maximize their ability to the fullest.

You retain the Henry and Bergkamp partnership and have Cruyff in a free role behind those two.

Koeman in a back-5 to hide his lack of pace but he would have had the license to march forward lot more in a back-5. And you also wouldn't really have needed a proper holder in a 5-2-1-2 set-up and both Vieira and Van Hanegem could have made more runs from midfield.

The problem with a back 5 with Koeman is that he has fewer passing options. He's best having wingers he can ping the ball to.

Ideally, yes.

But since we are playing in drafts are there are far more elite no 10s than elite CMs, majority use him behind a proper no 10. And considering how great and complete Lothar was, he would still be the most dominant central midfielder on the pitch anyway. I don't think its an issue. And especially alongside Redondo, its the perfect partnership.

I have no issues with his Redondo partnership. It is an ideal midfield two in a 442.

 

[The Red Viper]

The problem with a back 5 with Koeman is that he has fewer passing options. He's best having wingers he can ping the ball to.

I have no issues with his Redondo partnership. It is an ideal midfield two in a 442.

Well. He will still have Henry to stretch the play up-top or whenever he drifts out wide.

And you could go long towards Bergkamp and have him do a repeat of Argentina 1998 WC.

You won't maximize his passing to the fullest but at least you can hide his defensive issues which is an issue.

 

[Pat_Mustard]

not sure whats more tragic, mike building his team based on scrappy(or anyone from here) quote or cruyff acting as fecking pires

Why's that a bad role for him though? Pires had a tonne of freedom to do what he wanted creatively from that role, and there's no law to say that Cruyff can't play better than peak Pires from there (and peak Pires was pretty spectacular as well). Main point is that Cruyff's role on the left in this 4-2-3-1 is very different to a 4-2-3-1 with, say, van Nistelrooy at CF and Riquelme at No. 10, and I see no reason why he shouldn't thrive here.

 

[Enigma_87]

Why's that a bad role for him though? Pires had a tonne of freedom to do what he wanted creatively from that role, and there's no law to say that Cruyff can't play better than peak Pires from there (and peak Pires was pretty spectacular as well). Main point is that Cruyff's role on the left in this 4-2-3-1 is very different to a 4-2-3-1 with, say, van Nistelrooy at CF and Riquelme at No. 10, and I see no reason why he shouldn't thrive here.

Tbh I can’t see Cruyff playing a sidekick role and being the third best player on the team. Here he looks like he just compliments Bergkamp and Henry and I doubt that he would drop the initiative.

To me it’s either him or Bergkamp in the same team as neither bring the best of each other.

Cruyff played alongside other playmakers of course but they were playing in a deeper role (Van Hanegem / Neeskens) and it was them accepting being second fiddle. A bit like Puskas riding on the bus with Di Stefano being the driver.

 

[Šjor Bepo]

Why's that a bad role for him though? Pires had a tonne of freedom to do what he wanted creatively from that role, and there's no law to say that Cruyff can't play better than peak Pires from there (and peak Pires was pretty spectacular as well). Main point is that Cruyff's role on the left in this 4-2-3-1 is very different to a 4-2-3-1 with, say, van Nistelrooy at CF and Riquelme at No. 10, and I see no reason why he shouldn't thrive here.

because you go from arsenal team you wanted to remake to a cruyff team as he takes over the whole team.

 

[Pat_Mustard]

Feel like Pat will win ultimately because he has too much quality and that will end up helping him in the end.

But if I were in his position, I would have just played a RWB instead of Overmars.

That would have set his team up so much better and put all his best players in roles/positions where they would have been able to maximize their ability to the fullest.

You retain the Henry and Bergkamp partnership and have Cruyff in a free role behind those two.

Koeman in a back-5 to hide his lack of pace but he would have had the license to march forward lot more in a back-5. And you also wouldn't really have needed a proper holder in a 5-2-1-2 set-up and both Vieira and Van Hanegem could have made more runs from midfield.

Back five was an appealing option after I'd selected Thuram as my first pick but went out the window after Bepo took Amoros. The defensive options in this Wenger/Feyenoord pool are paper-thin. Good top-end quality but I'd likely have been fecked if I hadn't got Thuram and Cashley.

I've found myself watching a lot of 1990s Netherlands as well due to the pool and I've went full muppet over Overmars, as is the case sometimes when you start revisiting a player you haven't watched for a long time.

 

[Gio]

Henry makes it work for me. When he stretches the defence it creates space for Cruyff and Bergkamp to pick the ball up between the lines. I can see a contrast in styles between Bergkamp as a point (target) man who will enjoy the earlier direct ball, with Cruyff who will drop deeper and want to initiate more moves in the middle third.

Matthaus surging forwards is a big threat for Michael, especially with Paddy squared up with Redondo on the other side. Also back Enzo to be too cute at times here for the 3 big blokes he’ll come up against.

 

[Physiocrat]

Well. He will still have Henry to stretch the play up-top or whenever he drifts out wide.

And you could go long towards Bergkamp and have him do a repeat of Argentina 1998 WC.

You won't maximize his passing to the fullest but at least you can hide his defensive issues which is an issue.

I would prefer more of a DM than Vieira in front of him but defensively I think this a good setup which balances his defensive frailties and his passing ability. I suppose though the best setup for him would be 433 as it expose the defence overall a bit less but I like him here.

 

[Physiocrat]

Gone with Pat but TBF it was really close.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

.....Henry .......Bergkamp...
................Cruyff..........
Van Hanegem......Vieira
..................Gilbero

Is this better?

 

[Pat_Mustard]

Tbh I can’t see Cruyff playing a sidekick role and being the third best player on the team. Here he looks like he just compliments Bergkamp and Henry and I doubt that he would drop the initiative.

To me it’s either him or Bergkamp in the same team as neither bring the best of each other.

Cruyff played alongside other playmakers of course but they were playing in a deeper role (Van Hanegem / Neeskens) and it was them accepting being second fiddle. A bit like Puskas riding on the bus with Di Stefano being the driver.

because you go from arsenal team you wanted to remake to a cruyff team as he takes over the whole team.

No issues whatsoever with Cruyff taking over the team here. It's something to be welcomed in fact given that those Arsenal teams struggled to impose themselves too often in the big European matches relative to their talent. On Bergkamp, I never felt he brought much if any main-man ego with him (if anything he might have benefited from being slightly more imposing in terms of personality) so I doubt he'd be bristling at Cruyff running things either. Technically, where I think he'd work a treat with Cruyff is his ability to receive the ball with his back to goal and bring others into play. Plenty of examples in this comp, and it's striking how simple and economical he typically is in his use of the ball for such an outrageously gifted player:



I think Cruyff would love playing off someone who was that good at linking the play, particularly as Henry is typically bringing other things to the attack by stretching the play both vertically and horizantally with his movement.

 

[Pat_Mustard]

.....Henry .......Bergkamp...
................Cruyff..........
Van Hanegem......Vieira
..................Gilbero

Is this better?

Probably not with Thuram at RB. I did think long and hard about including Gilberto though, either in a three-man midfield or just as a straight replacement for van Hanegem in this formation.

 

[Pat_Mustard]

On Mike's pressing tactics:

• Never saw Weah in a proper pressing team, but he looked willing to work in the defensive phase and he could be a nightmare for defenders with his aggression and physicality in competing for 50/50 balls. I'd buy him as a very good fit for the tactic.
• Don't know about Enzo's defensive game, as it wasn't really part of his remit in whatever matches I've watched him in.
• Pires' Arsenal team pressed quite aggressively in phases, although Pires was one of their weaker and less intense defenders.
• I've actually seen Waddle and Papin engaging in a high press for Marseille, although it was before the back-pass rule kicked in so it was fairly sporadic. Waddle did work off-the-ball, and was able to play in a midfield three in England's 5-3-2 at WC 90, but I wouldn't consider him particularly intense at it.

I don't know - I don't think there's any complete and utter misfits for the pressing tactic in that front four, but collectively it doesn't look built for a particularly consistent or intense press either. And if the press fails we've got top-notch passing from deep in Koeman and van Hanegem to exploit it, and a brutal amount of pace and trickery in our attacking four against a not particularly pacy defence.

EDIT: Ribery is on the bench here actually, and he'd have ramped up the intensity a fair bit.

 

[Pat_Mustard]

Dedicated to @Physiocrat a right-footed right winger who delighted in dribbling past his marker on the outside. Lovely display from Overmars. Most of the flashy dribbles came early on, and did a fair bit of damage as England had to have Pallister and/or Sharpe ready to support Dorigo against him, opening up space in the centre for Bergkamp and De Boer. That double one-two with Bergkamp when he moved centrally was really nice as well, and he worked hard defensively to cap things off.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Harsh on Mike. One of the better teams drafted. Unfortunate to have this matchup.

 

[Šjor Bepo]

No issues whatsoever with Cruyff taking over the team here. It's something to be welcomed in fact given that those Arsenal teams struggled to impose themselves too often in the big European matches relative to their talent. On Bergkamp, I never felt he brought much if any main-man ego with him (if anything he might have benefited from being slightly more imposing in terms of personality) so I doubt he'd be bristling at Cruyff running things either. Technically, where I think he'd work a treat with Cruyff is his ability to receive the ball with his back to goal and bring others into play. Plenty of examples in this comp, and it's striking how simple and economical he typically is in his use of the ball for such an outrageously gifted player:



I think Cruyff would love playing off someone who was that good at linking the play, particularly as Henry is typically bringing other things to the attack by stretching the play both vertically and horizantally with his movement.

but if your tactics is arsenal remake and you end up with something completely different, its an issue? minor one but still....

with this being cruyff team, bergkamp(i get the interplay angle but he already has henry) is pretty much not needed and should be replaced with a holding mid as that would get the best out of both midfielders and cruyff.
think both wvh and vieira play their best football when they are alongside someone that is happy to hold position.

 

[Šjor Bepo]

a bit more quality in wide areas and id give it to mike, shame as its a nice team

 

[Pythagoras]

I think MichaelF7 has the better built team currently (his defence, midfield and attacking units being a better fit organically, and optimal use of his players in the 4-4-1-1), while Pat_Mustard's is a couple changes away from being perfect (i.e add Matthaus/Redondo/Kohler, rejig the attack, making Cruyff the cornerstone). A closer game than the score line shows IMO.

 

[Physiocrat]

Dedicated to @Physiocrat a right-footed right winger who delighted in dribbling past his marker on the outside. Lovely display from Overmars. Most of the flashy dribbles came early on, and did a fair bit of damage as England had to have Pallister and/or Sharpe ready to support Dorigo against him, opening up space in the centre for Bergkamp and De Boer. That double one-two with Bergkamp when he moved centrally was really nice as well, and he worked hard defensively to cap things off.

 

[The Red Viper]

Back five was an appealing option after I'd selected Thuram as my first pick but went out the window after Bepo took Amoros. The defensive options in this Wenger/Feyenoord pool are paper-thin. Good top-end quality but I'd likely have been fecked if I hadn't got Thuram and Cashley.

I've found myself watching a lot of 1990s Netherlands as well due to the pool and I've went full muppet over Overmars, as is the case sometimes when you start revisiting a player you haven't watched for a long time.

Thing is Overmars is fine.

Just that it makes things tricky both Bergkamp and Cruyff being there.

And unless you want to sacrifice Bergkamp, feel like sacrificing Overmars for a RWB would have ended up covering your weaknesses while still retaining your strong points really well.

 

[Pat_Mustard]

but if your tactics is arsenal remake and you end up with something completely different, its an issue? minor one but still....

with this being cruyff team, bergkamp(i get the interplay angle but he already has henry) is pretty much not needed and should be replaced with a holding mid as that would get the best out of both midfielders and cruyff.
think both wvh and vieira play their best football when they are alongside someone that is happy to hold position.

I see your point, and I did over-egg the Arsenal angle, although I'm still quite taken with the front four and not sure if I'm going to ditch it. I really like the different qualities they bring here and how they'd interact with each other. I do agree on Wim and Vieira though, and I knew as soon as I sent my tactics that I was being greedy there and should have just played Gilberto instead.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Always felt Matthaus if under Fergie in a 4-4-2 would have eclipsed even his Inter peak.