Redafe Champions League Draft - Ralaks v Feeky

Who will win based on players in their prime, team tactics, balance & bench strength?

  • Total voters
    35
  • Poll closed .
Yeah I wouldn't go for Toure at centre back either, but if you were then you can't take off Deschamps.

The Sneijder sub could work, though you are only one vote behind so its not as if this current one is a disaster.
 
One argument for leaving it as is for now is that I reckon Ralaks's defence could struggle quite badly against a team that has a lot of possession. Particularly Pique and Capdevila have looked much poorer in teams that don't have a monopoly on the possession.
 
Couldn't show it on the formation as that website doesn't have arrows, but Silva wouldn't be playing exclusively behind the forwards, he'd be drifting across the pitch between midfield and the forwards. Given Ralaks's line-up I'd certainly be instructing him to get at the full-backs, which he does very well.
 
Ralak's midfield reminiscing our best ever midfield 4: Giggs-Scholes-Keano-Beckham to Overmars-Effenberg-Keano-Beckham. And I have a strong dislike for Ibra (think he's a massive twat and a bottler).

Otherwise, both very strong teams (and I think I'd have lost against any of these two).
 
I've voted for Ralaks as well. Sorry feeky, in a diamond the fullbacks have probably the biggest responsibility to make the whole thing work and I don't think the ones you have are up to the task. I think Effenberg and Keane is strong enough to hold their own in front of you, they might not have the lion's share of possession but they can certainly provide the required platform for the wingers and forwards that is needed. Beckham to Trezegol is a very lethal combo. There is also the possibility of Del Piero going leftwards with Overmars running at Maldini, something which he did with devastating effect in that Euro 2000 game, one of the few occassions where Paolo was exposed quite badly. I think there's more functionality in Ralaks' front 4 with directness from one side and pin point crossing from the other, and as someone said Scholes without having the joy to ping balls wide could be left crowded out in there and you possibly can't ask your fullbacks to provide an out and out attacking outlet against those wingers. Lastly as much as I love Bergkamp for his consistent contribution over the years, he has failed to deliver at the big stage a few times and against players with characters such as Keano and Effenberg, you can see him getting overwhelmed to an extent. That's the smallest worry though, main is what I wrote before that, and if Trezegol manages to occupy Paolo, with Lucio's notorious nature of rushing out of defense, Overmars is going to dash through and nick a goal there.
 
AldoRaine18 said:
I've voted for Ralaks as well. Sorry feeky, in a diamond the fullbacks have probably the biggest responsibility to make the whole thing work and I don't think the ones you have are up to the task. I think Effenberg and Keane is strong enough to hold their own in front of you, they might not have the lion's share of possession but they can certainly provide the required platform for the wingers and forwards that is needed. Beckham to Trezegol is a very lethal combo. There is also the possibility of Del Piero going leftwards with Overmars running at Maldini, something which he did with devastating effect in that Euro 2000 game, one of the few occassions where Paolo was exposed quite badly. I think there's more functionality in Ralaks' front 4 with directness from one side and pin point crossing from the other, and as someone said Scholes without having the joy to ping balls wide could be left crowded out in there and you possibly can't ask your fullbacks to provide an out and out attacking outlet against those wingers. Lastly as much as I love Bergkamp for his consistent contribution over the years, he has failed to deliver at the big stage a few times and against players with characters such as Keano and Effenberg, you can see him getting overwhelmed to an extent. That's the smallest worry though, main is what I wrote before that, and if Trezegol manages to occupy Paolo, with Lucio's notorious nature of rushing out of defense, Overmars is going to dash through and nick a goal there.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about this notion that my team would dominate the possession but still lose.

In Champions League finals since Milan fecked it against Liverpool:

Greater possession 2-1 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 1-1 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 3-1 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 0-2 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 2-0 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 1-1 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 2-1 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 2-1 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 3-3 Lesser Possession

5 wins, 3 draws, 1 loss for the team with greater possession. And in each of the 3 draws the team with greater possession had the more chances. The only time the team with lesser possession one was a team absolutely drilled in winning with lesser possession in Mourinho's Inter. I'm not saying having more possession means an automatic win, we've all seen games where teams with less possession pull it off, but it certainly gives greater chances for winning.
 
To counter that, I can bring up the games of Spain in the World Cup where they had immense possession yet still hung by the tiniest of margins against both Germany and Holland. Took a set piece to win it for them in the semi and took a woeful Robben missing one on ones to get it done in extra time in the final. They also lost against Swiss and pretty sure they had more possession in that one. It's the fact that your team is going to have most of the possession in harmless areas of the pitch and before you can reach near the goal you will have someone like a Keane tracking back and taking care of it.

Your two best players on the ball, Scholes and Bergkamp, both thrived with genuine width in the team. Pires, Ljunberg, Giggs and Beckham. As I said I think it would be suicide if your fullbacks decide to go all out forward while leaving space behind for those deadly wingers, one of which is one of the paciest players you will ever find. So a lot of the time your team will be begging for width and it will be the likes of Silva and Toure drifting wide to open up play which sadly won't be enough IMO. In that cagey affair even if you have larger possession, you aren't as likely to find an easy route to goal as the opposition, who have a great crosser + great header in the team to start with. As great as Maldini was, he was primarily a left back and even though he was world class at centre back, he has to defend probably the most accurate cross you will find in this draft. It's a great task in itself and one that deserves full attention. Then you have Del Piero and Overmars linking up, both quite versatile so that can interchange and stretch play decently. Effenberg's got a brilliant passing range and can find Overmars making any runs behind your defense.

All this is without the mentality taken into account. Keane and Effenberg are born winners, while Ibra on the other hand has quite the opposite reputation.
 
They still won both games. And the point is not whether it is possible to lose, of course it is, I'm just saying in general it gives you more of a chance. And I wouldn't say my team would have harmless possession, it's got two players up front who are amongst the best in the draft at holding onto the ball in the final third, which is one of the biggest statistical necessities for winning matches.
 
Well I think the list you pulled reads more as "The team that won had more possession" which is certainly is likely scenario most times, whereas here we are debating whether "the team that looks much more dominant in possession would win the game or not" which IMO are two different things and the two don't always necessarily imply each other.

Anyway I've cast my vote and told you the reasons which I stand by. The voting shows how close it is and can go either ways. Two very contrasting styles with people going for their personal preferences, and you have provided a great defense for your team which is admirable.
 
AldoRaine18 said:
Well I think the list you pulled reads more as "The team that won had more possession" which is certainly is likely scenario most times, whereas here we are debating whether "the team that looks much more dominant in possession would win the game or not" which IMO are two different things and the two don't always necessarily imply each other.

Anyway I've cast my vote and told you the reasons which I stand by. The voting shows how close it is and can go either ways. Two very contrasting styles with people going for their personal preferences, and you have provided a great defense for your team which is admirable.
Click to expand...

Agree to disagree!

Some guy told me on Twitter he liked my team better but he doesn't have an account so couldn't vote. fecking discrimination.
 
Feeky_Magee said:
What do people think about the role possession would play in this game? Scholes, Silva, Deschamps, Bergkamp and Touré would boss the possession I reckon, for all the undoubted talents of Keane and Effenberg they could get passed to death. Even more so after one of them loses the head and gets sent off. ;)
Click to expand...

Keane was an absolute great at maintaining possession and keeping the ball moving himself. He and Becks have previous in dealing successfully with 3 man midfields containing Deschamps too. ;)

I'm leaning towards Ralaks at the moment, but I can't really justify voting for him at this stage when you've argued your case well and he hasn't at all! Going to sit this one out for now.
 
Pat_Mustard said:
Keane was an absolute great at maintaining possession and keeping the ball moving himself. He and Becks have previous in dealing successfully with 3 man midfields containing Deschamps too. ;)

I'm leaning towards Ralaks at the moment, but I can't really justify voting for him at this stage when you've argued your case well and he hasn't at all! Going to sit this one out for now.
Click to expand...

He was, in fairness. Always thought he was an underrated passer of the ball.
 
Feeky_Magee said:
I'm not sure about this notion that my team would dominate the possession but still lose.

In Champions League finals since Milan fecked it against Liverpool:

Greater possession 2-1 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 1-1 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 3-1 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 0-2 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 2-0 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 1-1 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 2-1 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 2-1 Lesser Possession
Greater possession 3-3 Lesser Possession

5 wins, 3 draws, 1 loss for the team with greater possession. And in each of the 3 draws the team with greater possession had the more chances. The only time the team with lesser possession one was a team absolutely drilled in winning with lesser possession in Mourinho's Inter. I'm not saying having more possession means an automatic win, we've all seen games where teams with less possession pull it off, but it certainly gives greater chances for winning.
Click to expand...


But honestly did the teams have the midfield and wingers I have? Nope. It's easy just to pull up random statistics without them meaning feck all honestly.

I don't think, my midfield and wingers will end up losing against a midfield 3 containting Deschamps who at his prime was nothing more than an enforcer. They'll be highly pressured on the wings, which whill easen up and split up the midfield imo. Keane and Effenberg might be tough guys, but dont end up liking them up to players like Cattermole, they had way more than tackling skills to their game.
 
Ralaks said:
But honestly did the teams have the midfield and wingers I have? Nope. It's easy just to pull up random statistics without them meaning feck all honestly.

I don't think, my midfield and wingers will end up losing against a midfield 3 containting Deschamps who at his prime was nothing more than an enforcer. They'll be highly pressured on the wings, which whill easen up and split up the midfield imo. Keane and Effenberg might be tough guys, but dont end up liking them up to players like Cattermole, they had way more than tackling skills to their game.
Click to expand...

Harsh on Deschamps! He was a fine passer of the ball, particularly short passes, very rarely gave it away. Can see him, Scholes, Touré and Silva linking up well with little triangles. And I'm in no way denigrating Keane and Effenberg, I've already said I think Keane was a great passer, and Effenberg passed well too, I'm just saying that with my 3, Silva making that 4 sometimes, and Bergkamp and Ibrahimovic both excellent ball retainers that I think I'll dominate the possession.
 
I don't think my midfield will lack creativity really, it's not like my midfield two can't create, it might not be what they are know for, but they both know how to pass a ball, equally surpassing Deschamps and Toure at the very least imo. Either way I won't be depending on those two to really create it all, Del Piero and my wingers will have that role so I'm not worried really. My wingers will dominate this game as far as I'm concerned. Trezeguet will love Becks cross and Overmars will love his long passes.

I can't stres enough how much I expext Becks and Rafael to dominate Marcelo.
 
Marcelo's solid defensively, and has a certain Paulo Maldini helping him on the left side of defence.
 
If we're talking domination, I think Bergkamp and Ibrahimovic can really get at Ramos and Pique.
 
Feeky_Magee said:
If we're talking domination, I think Bergkamp and Ibrahimovic can really get at Ramos and Pique.
Click to expand...


I agree those two are not that good imo. Pique is the most technically astute defender around but at the actual art of defending his is so-so, beaten too often poor leadership qualities for a player who has scaled the heights he has. Puyol kept him in line. Same with Ramos rash challenges galore and such a cynical player already booked so much and it should be more he relies mainly on his athletic ability but they have the quality of Keane and Effnberg in front of them. Your midfields a bit mehhh for me despite the individual quality it is not a good fit.
 
Pique surging forward can often make a difference in very tight games but in this particular one it could be counter productive?
 
Late substitution:

Seeing that Ralaks's defence is looking edgy I bring on Wesley Sneijder for Yaya Touré. Deschamps pushes up alongside Scholes and is instructed to win the ball and feed Scholes, the Frenchman's two biggest strengths. Scholes is instructed to spread it wide when possible. Sneijder is playing in his early Ajax position of left wing, though he will cut inside often. David Silva is put on the right wing where he thrived for Valencia and is put on the weak link of Capdevila. As a more natural wide player than Sneijder he'll be cutting inside less, though he still will when Scholes or Bergkamp find space in the middle, and play little exchanges towards the edge of the box. My wing-backs Srna and Marcelo will be instructed to overlap Sneijder and Silva, and put real pressure on Rafael and Capdevila.

750325_Brazil.jpg
 
Great sub, makes your team much stronger in my eyes, but it may have come too late to be really effective.

I'll be voting before the poll ends, just need to make my final decision.
 
Yup, turned into a bit of a cluster feck for me, even more than it was already.

Sneijder, Silva, Bergkamp and to a lesser extent Ibra will be operating in the same areas IMO.
 
Silva and Sneijder will be both staying mostly wide to capitalise on the full-backs. Ibra will be right up top.

Rafael-Ramos-Pique-Capdevila is not a defence I trust late on in a game against the magic those chaps are capable of producing. And they're all quality technical players who have no problem with operating in tight spaces with teammates around. In fact they thrive on it, Silva and Bergkamp in particular.
 
Had to go with Ralaks.

It's the better constructed team IMO, feeky had the better defence but everything else seemed a bit convoluted.
 
Do people not think Zlatan would make hay against Ramos and Pique? He had about as many goals as Ronaldo last season excluding penalties.
 
Feeky_Magee said:
Silva and Sneijder will be both staying mostly wide to capitalise on the full-backs. Ibra will be right up top.

Rafael-Ramos-Pique-Capdevila is not a defence I trust late on in a game against the magic those chaps are capable of producing. And they're all quality technical players who have no problem with operating in tight spaces with teammates around. In fact they thrive on it, Silva and Bergkamp in particular.
Click to expand...


In their primes they where players who played centrally so I agree I expect the middle to be clustered too many similar midfielders imo.
 
I think Silvas best form came when he was out wide cutting in.
 
Frick. Well done Ralaks. Serves me right for mostly operating under the draft policy of drafting the best player available rather than constructing a team.
 
Unlucky Feeky. Came up against one of the best teams imo. No one drafted better than Ralaks. His defence needs improving now though
 
ralaks had a really solid midfield and a weak defence. I would have voted for Feeky (was busy the whole day) but ralaks apart from defence has a very good set-up.
 
oh and i see that ralaks didn't even bother with arguing a case for his team and yet he won. that is quite impressive considering the individuals Feeky had
 
Feeky_Magee said:
Frick. Well done Ralaks. Serves me right for mostly operating under the draft policy of drafting the best player available rather than constructing a team.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I don't see your initial setup but from the two teamsheets I was surprised it was even close. He has a side that works, yours is a collection of great individuals (with some not as good ones in key areas).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.