Remake Draft R16 | Brwned vs DavidG

[Joga Bonito]

Voters are asked to consider the XIs featured as remakes of classic teams, and to consider to what extent the manager has succeeded in re-creating both the individual roles and the overall functionality of the original. THIS IS NOT A FANTASY MATCH BETWEEN TWO SIDES, but rather a comparison of remakes.

Please feel free to tag the managers if you require more information about their set-ups/players etc.

Team Brwned:​

Philosophy/Ideology of tactical set-up

Functional. Organised. Hard-working. They are the three key components of the 1966 World Cup team, and as a result they’re still seen today as critical components in the ideal English player. No fancy-dan #10s coasting about the field letting others do the work - the ideal is another Bobby Charlton, a truly complete player. That overarching philosophy exists right across the team.

There was nothing truly unique about this team - it was simply a collection of very capable individuals who were happy to sacrifice themselves for the team and create a whole better than the sum of its parts. That’s where England’s golden generation fell down, trying to fit in too many superstars and too many square pegs in round holes. Here we have the core of the golden generation with the addition of some selfless, tireless, multifunctional players to balance the team.

Style - Direct

Defense

Defensive Line - Normal
Marking - Man-marking
Off the ball - Aggressive closing down
On the ball - Build up Play/Rapid transitions through sweeper/Basic & risk-free passing to midfield etc

In the back four we have a unique proposition - a back four that knows each other’s games inside out and proved to be formidable against the toughest opponents. Jackie Charlton and Bobby Moore were your typical stopper-sweeper partnership and the foundation of that partnership was a telephathic understanding of where their partner is and how they would react in any situation. Wilson was one of the stalwarts in the team; very experienced and incredibly reliable. Cohen was the last to join that back four, integrating fully in the team just a year before the World Cup, but he slotted in seamlessly and was tasked with providing width in a team that played with no wingers.

Midfield

In midfield, we have a combination of steel, energy, intelligence and class, but above all else a level of cohesion that brings out the best of everyone’s distinct talents. Stiles was the typical destroyer, shuttting down everything that got in his way. Ahead of Stiles you had three players that all had fundamentally the same role - support the attack, support the defence, knit the play together. They were a trio of all-rounders.

Attack

In attack we have two tireless #9s - one excelling as a target man, the other as a constant threat in behind. Their role when the team's in possession is to stretch the opposition defence every which way, pulling out wide into the space or darting in behind at every opportunity. On the ball, their incessant running and defending from the front is critical in setting the tone for the team and forcing the opposition defence and midfield to concede possession easily.

Player Roles

In goal we have Joe Hart replacing the legendary Gordon Banks. Both play a significant role in the team through their personalities alone, and both capable of exceptional reaction saves and impossible saves 1-on-1. Fundamentally they are both exponents of a traditional goalkeeping style.

At left back we have Ashley Cole replacing Wilson, a man remembered by many as the first modern fullback. Whilst that may be a bit of English exaggeration - there were many before him - it is true that his role in the team was that of the modern fullback. Provide width on the flanks, support in attack at every opportunity and inject energy into the team. However a fullback’s #1 priority then was defence first. Ashley Cole fits that role perfectly. Cohen’s role was much the same on the opposing flank, with Gary Neville suitably stepping in to replace Cohen’s dangerous crosses. Rio Ferdinand is Bobby Moore’s only peer in English football, displaying the same combination of elegance, intelligence and immaculate timing. Jackie Charlton was your typical English bruiser; a brave, combative, tireless defender with real strength in the air. Terry slots into that role with ease.

Stiles was a warrior, a terrier, very quick across the ground and incessantly nibbling at people’s feet before playing the easy ball onto his more talented counterparts. Hargreaves fulfilled that role for club and country with aplomb, introducing himself to the world with a sterling man-marking job on Pablo Aimar in the 2000 UCL final, and re-introducing himself to the English public in 2006 as their player of the tournament.

Bobby Charlton was equally capable of being the matchwinner (vs. Portugal in the semi-final) or sacrificing himself for the team and man-marking the oppostion’s key player (vs. Beckenbauer in the final). He was the figurehead of the midfield and attack in one, an all-rounder with a responsibility to score the important goals in the important moments.

Ball was a tireless worker, and is remembered for his endless energy, but on top of that he was a very intelligent passer and very cleverly found space in a crowded midfield. He was a supporting player in every sense of the word, and in every phase of the game. Win the ball back, drive forward in possession, pick out a simple but incisive pass in attack. Beckham offers all that and more. While his pinpoint crosses took the limelight, it was his tireless workrate which provided the much needed balance in that United quartet. He spent much of his career telling people he wanted to play in the middle, and here he has the opportunity to do just that. On the occasions when he does drift out wide, he's more than capable of replicating Alan Ball's cross for Hurst's 2nd goal in the final many times over.

Peters was described by Sir Alf Ramsey as being a player ahead of his time. Intelligent, perceptive, creative, elegant and with plenty of skill. The essential element is that he was hard-working on top of that. He was also one of the youngsters in the team with just a few caps to his name, but by the time he’d finished his first game in the tournament he’d made it clear he was a critical component with his creative influence and goal threat. Dele Alli has been described as all of the same things over the past season. A precocious talent with a great combination of physique and technique with a tireless workrate.

Hunt is remembered by Liverpool fans as one of the superstars of the era and one of their heroes, a tremendous goalscorer. He’s remembered by England fans as an awkward workhorse who scored some important goals. George Hurst is remembered fundamentally the same way. Both players worked tirelessly for the time, defending from the front, pulling out wide and running in behind, fighting for every lost cause. Harry Kane and Jamie Vardy have displayed all of the same qualities throughout their careers with the goalscoring touch to match.

 

[Joga Bonito]

England 1966/Sir Alf Ramsey (4-1-3-2)..../.....................Brwned's Modern Remake

 

[Joga Bonito]

Team DavidG:
​

Style -Possession and Dribbling based. With a goalkeeper capable of launching attacks and excellent ball-playing defender's, the ball was constantly being delivered to the front 5. The attacking onslaught's just did not stop, and the pace at which they countered was apparently frightening.


Defence

Defensive Line - Normal
Marking - Zonal
Off the ball - Aggressive closing down from the front , as-well as Rooney/Moreno dropping in to help the right hand side and Ramos and Rodolfi covering both sides of the pitch between them
On the ball - Rapid transitions through sweeper/Basic & risk-free passing to midfield and attackers. Goalkeeper excellent distribution with his feet.

Midfield

Veron (Rodolfi) and Thiago (Ramos) held the fort in central midfield, with Ramires playing the foil to Thiago's creativity from deeper areas of the pitch. Rooney (Moreno) drifts into the centre ahead of the central midfielders, orchestrating attacks with his exquisite range of passing.

Attack

Best way to sum this up is that when Di Stefano came into La Maquina, he was effectively an understudy to the attackers of this team. all 5 of the players are capable of popping up anywhere in the final 3rd and dictating the play. All were supremely fit athletes and the pace of the two wider players on the left ( bale/ Loastao and Henry/ Labruna) was devastating as Ibrahimovic ( Pedernera) simply pulled off the opposing teams centre backs, confusing them and ultimately opening up tons of space in behind. The role Pedernera played is very similar to the modern day false 9, with the expectation being he would assist and create just as often as he would score.

Goalkeeper- Jose Carrizo. Remained in Argentina his entire career, with River plate for 20+ years. He was an extremely competent goalkeeper capable of launching attacks with his feet. I chose Igor Akinfeev to replicate him due to his willingness to remain in his home country and his undoubted ability with his feet as a goalkeeper. Re-creation success- 9/10

RCB- Norberto Yacono. He was extremely small, but made up for this with a phenomenal leap and astounding pace. A true athlete, he took no prisoners in defence and although capable of getting forward, left that to the much more capable players on the right side. Ivan Cordoba is one of the great south american RCB's, and his small height was never seen as an issue, due to his reading of the game and him being one of the quickest centre backs around. This naturally meant that he would often be deployed as a right back due to his ability to overlap but also get back in his defensive position very quickly. Re-creation Success- 9/10

LCB- Bernabe Ferreyra. Quite simply, he was an uncompromising defender who left the fancy stuff up to the other players. He did his job, albeit aggressively at times, and was also not scared to join the attack particularly when River plate were 2/3 goals in front. Gabriel Heinze is about as uncompromising an Argentinian defender as there has ever been, equally adept at performing the responsibilities of both a left back and a centre Back. Re-creation success - 8/10

CB- Ricardo Vaghi. Extremely temperamental, but a true leader on the pitch. He also had an uncompromising style, but his reading of the game was excellent. Giorgio Chiellini is one of the toughest defender's in the modern game, however is much more technical than Vaghi could ever have dreamed of ( Vaghi was a heavy smoker and not much of an athlete) so it could be argued that a modern day Chiellini would have made this la Maquina team even better. Bottom line, the role Vaghi played for this team, Chiellini does it week in, week out for Juventus. Re-creation success- 7/10

RCM- Bruno Rodolfi. played the foil to Ramos, using his pace and strength to break up attacks and help the defence. Extremely comfortable on the ball, he was happy to distribute the ball as soon as he got it and let the more technical attacking players do their thing, though he was capable of joining the attack if need be. Veron slots in great here, with his work ethic and " for the team" attitude clearly replicating Rodolfi's. Veron was extremely comfortable on the ball too, capable of playing exceptionally quick one touch stuff. He had the engine and determination to influence the attack but was equally as astute defensively. Ideal box-to box midfielder. Re-creation success- 8/10

LCM- Jose Ramos. A Deep lying midfielder capable of dictating the play from central midfield and getting forward to join in the attacks. Thiago slots into this role so nicely. only Pirlo and Xavi would have played it better, but I had other more important positions to fill hence not taking them. Re-creation success- 8/10

RW- Juan Carlos Munoz. a traditional outside right who possessed lightning pace and exceptional dribbling abilities. He stayed glued to the wing when off the ball but as soon as an attack began to develop on his side he was gone. Ludovic Giuly would have stayed on the right wing for Barcelona for many more years had it not been for the emergence of Messi. He was one of the last players who possessed all the natural right winger attributes who actually just stayed on that side, none of this left footer on the right or false winger crap. Re-creation success- 9/10

LW- Felix Loastao. Capable of getting back and defending, but his main attribute was his acceleration. Once he was gone, there was no catching him, and his delivery enabled Angel Labruna to notch a fair amount of his goals. He possessed a great shot, and although he was mainly a direct player similar to Munoz on the right, he was more adept at cutting inside. In fact the best way to sum up how he played, is to refer to the man who's replicating him's best performance. Gareth Bale v Inter Milan in the champions league. Thats how Loastao played week in week out and thats why the earlier tottenham version of Gareth Bale ( where he started becoming world class) was chosen to replace him. Re-creation success- 9/10

RAM- " Charro " Moreno. He was known as a player of great technique, great vision, and lethal in the penalty area. Despite his reputation for drinking, smoking and not going to training, Moreno was also known for his formidable heading ability and fine physical qualities. He dictated the pace of play with his range of passing, dribbling and fine finishing. He would also help out defensively, ensuring Yacono has some help if required. Wayne Rooney was the best remaining player I could think of for this role. He drinks, smokes, has an occasional horrible attitude but is undoubtedly an excellent creator, capable of exquisite long passes to orchestrate attacks and has a finishers instinct with both head and feet. We have all seen him run the length of the field just to put in a few tackles close to his own goalline too. Re-creation success- 8/10

CF/SS- Adolfo Pedernera- Even though his best years coincided with the war, the global game was still aware of this mans ability and stature. Strong, fit and two footed, he played like a modern day false 9, comfortable enough to lead the line but also extremely efficient at dropping back, receiving the ball and dictating play. Zlatan, in his later years especially, embodies this. People question his ability to play for the team, but some of his assists and involvement in build-up play completely re-buff this theory. In La Maquina, Pedernera was the man. Zlatan is the man in this team. Re-creation rating- 8/10

LF/ST- Angel Labruna. One of the greatest goal-scorers in Argentinian History. Devastating acceleration, insane top speed, close control, precise finishing and a tendency to cut in from the left and run in behind the defence. It's insane how similar that description is to the man who replaces him in this team, Thierry Henry. It's the reason i chose him first, and the similarity is uncanny. The way henry played with Bergkamp is similar to the way Labruna played with Pedernera, and ibrahimovic is not a bad replacement in terms of this historic duo. Re-creation rating- 10/10

 

[Joga Bonito]

River 1941 - Renato Cesarini (3-2-5)............................................/.....................DavidG's Modern Remake

 

[Joga Bonito]

Good luck @Brwned @DavidG

 

[Deleted member 101472]

Just an added little piece I used in the first game to give a more overall idea to people what La Maquina was about


"I play against La Maquina with the full intention of beating them, but as a fan of football, I would prefer to sit on the stands and watch them play" - Ernesto Lazatti, Boca Juniors star of 1940s


My research has made me hate world war 2 even more. Things were so bad on this planet that it culminated in an actual global war. Millions were lost, landscapes were changed forever, and although admittedly way less important, a true appreciation of one of the greatest sides ever to play the game was deemed never to be achieved. The River Plate team of the early to mid 1940's has it's place in history, known as La Maquina, but without the video's and English language analysis of just WHY they were so successful, it will likely be difficult to ever convince a large audience that they were that good. Nonetheless;

The basic idea of La Maquina was to load the offensive third with frighteningly good attacking players, all capable of interchanging positions for the full 90 minutes. The team adopted a dribbling/possession based approach, often recycling the ball around the midfield and attack for long passages of play without ever attempting a shot on goal. Think of the total football dutch team, and the way they changed positions with such ease. Now combine that with the arsenal teams of recent years who would rather walk the ball into the net. That's as close as an idea as you will get to how this team played. The midfield and defence were all very capable on the ball, with the defender's being particularly adept off the ball due to their pace and athleticism.

To simplify it, La Maquina was so talented that it effectively just battered teams for fun, and although often accused of adopting a somewhat " We will just score more than you" approach, in 4 of the 6 seasons that La Maquina played together, they conceded by far the fewest goals in the league. Make no mistake, this team knew how to defend.

 

[harms]

I know that I probably sound like a hater, but Brwned failed to recreate the most important player in the set-up. Instead of a tactically flawless, hardworking roaming playmaker with a deadly shot he has a limited (if we're talking about the very best) technically Gerrard who never possessed enough intelligence to orchestrate the game (watch the famous Sacchi's quote), whose only similar qualities are his stamina (he probably runs even more than Sir Bobby tbf) and shooting from the distance. Let alone the difference in their mentality. But the recreated team doesn't have a playmaker now, even Moore who provided brilliant passing from the back is replaced by Rio, who wasn't much of a passer, he mainly ran with the ball forward using his on-the-ball skills.

 

[Joga Bonito]

I know that I probably sound like a hater, but Brwned failed to recreate the most important player in the set-up. Instead of a tactically flawless, hardworking roaming playmaker with a deadly shot he has a limited (if we're talking about the very best) technically Gerrard who never possessed enough intelligence to orchestrate the game (watch the famous Sacchi's quote), whose only similar qualities are his stamina (he probably runs even more than Sir Bobby tbf) and shooting from the distance. Let alone the difference in their mentality. But the recreated team doesn't have a playmaker now, even Moore who provided brilliant passing from the back is replaced by Rio, who wasn't much of a passer, he mainly ran with the ball forward using his on-the-ball skills.

I get where you are coming from and I actually shared your concerns too initially, but having pondered over it, I'd have to disagree with you to a certain extent. Recreating Sir Bobby was always going to be mission impossible (even in an all-time pool if you ask me) and if you narrow down his key qualities on the ball, it would arguably be his dribbling, playmaking, goalscoring, two-footedness etc. There is no doubting his individual quality and if we want to remake that elegant playmaking side of Charlton than someone like Iniesta would have been a good fit - without the goals that is.

However, if we take the whole package of Sir Bobby into account - his sheer industry, malleability across various phases, tactical nous etc - it becomes more complicated. Actually Iniesta has most of these qualities in abundance too but just not at that level, and he also lacks the goalscoring edge which was a critical component of Sir Bobby's game and his role in England 1966. The thing that stands out most for me about Sir Bobby is his mentality - his selflessness, his graft, zero tactical baggage etc. I mean there have been many players throughout history having this side of the game to them, but it's bloody rare to find it in an attacking player and that too in a top 10 GOAT imo. Imagine being an attacking playmaker in ballon d'Or & WC Golden Ball winning form and going into the WC final, which is being held at your home country incidentally, coming off the back of a 2 goal salvo in the semis, and being asked to man-mark a pesky in-form 20 year old from the opposition's side...

You can imagine the likes of Puskas, Pele, Zico, Platini etc and even di Stefano asking the manager to piss off. Well firstly, most of em except di Stefano wouldn't have had the ability to do such a job and even if they did their ego would have clearly prevented them from carrying out such a job. That's what made Sir Bobby special imo, he didn't really need a platform to be built for him to accommodate him or his game etc and he always put the team first etc. There is a reason why the English team's formation is always referred to as a 4-1-3-2 as opposed to a standard diamond with a #10 etc, simply because Charlton wasn't an average #10 and his work rate, constant covering for the likes of Peters/Ball and dropping back into the midfield etc truly elevated his role in that team, more so than 'just' being a goalscoring playmaker.

So ultimately it boils down to whether you want to place more emphasis on Sir Bobby's sheer technical ingenuity and effortless grace, or his selfless mentality and unbelievable team-ethic, workrate etc. Make no mistake Gerrard wasn't exactly a purely limited grafter either, so it's not like you are completely abandoning recreating the former category and Starfish was a fairly gifted player after all, just not overly technical or creative. It's his all-roundedness (ability to truly influence the midfield, selfless nature, goalscoring ability, industry etc) and his mental side of the game which leads me to think it's not such a bad remake given the circumstances. Another thing we have to weigh is which side of Sir Bobby's game was more critical to England executing their game plan and whilst both were important, I'd say the latter category proved to be more critical for that pragmatic England side imo.

Once again, don't get me wrong, I'm not downplaying Sir Bobby's individual quality (United & England's greatest ever and a top 10 GOAT imo) but just stating that it's incredible that for someone so gifted, creative and technical, he was so remarkably well-rounded and an immense package overall. As such we shouldn't just adopt a more reductionist view with regards to his 'pure individual ability' alone (not saying that you did that as you've clearly taken his tactical acumen into account) but also place more emphasis on his all-round game and his unique role for England 1966.

 

[Ecstatic]

This thread

 

[Ecstatic]

I am a fan of the Charlton/Gerrard (at his prime of course) choice and think it makes sense for many reasons: work-rate, leadership skills, similar stats, passing skills, credentials.

Of course, Charlton had better dribbling & technical skills.

 

[harms]

So ultimately it boils down to whether you want to place more emphasis on Sir Bobby's sheer technical ingenuity and effortless grace, or his selfless mentality and unbelievable team-ethic, workrate etc. Make no mistake Gerrard wasn't exactly a purely limited grafter either, so it's not like you are completely abandoning recreating the former category and Starfish was a fairly gifted player after all, just not overly technical or creative. It's his all-roundedness (ability to truly influence the midfield, selfless nature, goalscoring ability, industry etc) and his mental side of the game which leads me to think it's not such a bad remake given the circumstances. Another thing we have to weigh is which side of Sir Bobby's game was more critical to England executing their game plan and whilst both were important, I'd say the latter category proved to be more critical for that pragmatic England side imo.

Well, we just have different views on Gerrard's mentality then. Like you said, Sir Bobby's lack of tactical baggage and absolutely unique selflessness were as important for the team as were his playmaking or goalscoring. But I don't see Gerrard as a selfless player - quite the opposite in fact. He always wants to be in the spotlight, be it his countless shots from the distance or his trademark Hollywood balls. Don't get me wrong, he was a very talented player, obviously, and sometimes those risks paid off, which granted him a completely undeserved reputation of a great leader and a team player. He isn't called Steve Me for no reason.

And another thing, which I mentioned but maybe I should've highlighted it more. Sir Bobby was both the orchestrator and the water carrier (in Russian we have the saying "carrying the piano" which shares the same meaning but is probably more apt to the orchestrator tag), which made him one of the most unique GOAT players. But let's take a look at Brwned recreation and try to feel the team's chemistry.

England's main playmaker was Sir Bobby, obviously. Ball and Moore can probably share the role of secondary playmakers. Brnwed replaced all of them with the players incapable of setting tempo and dictating the game with their passing. Beckham and Gerrard (less often) can pick a brilliant pass, but they won't be able to control the game, Rio was more of a ball-carrier than an actual playmaking from the back.

So here we have a team without one of the most basic functions, they have enough energy to run around for 90 minutes (that's why Sir Bobby's engine was not so critical to replicate), but, like headless chickens, they will do it without an actual thought behind it.

I know that Brwned couldn't have picked Iniesta because of his self-restrictions, but he is really the best recreation of Sir Bobby today (especially for this particular team). He impresses me more and more as the time goes, mainly with his much improved defensive game (which allows MSN to play as free as they do) of late. He will match Charlton's playmaking and smart movement and his goalscoring record in the big games is actually quite good (not at Sir Bobby's level of course, but still) - and I always consider those drafts to be the equivalent of CL or WC play-offs, where Iniesta's statistical contribution is much more impressive than his career stats.

 

[Deleted member 101472]

I like that England team though agree that one or two heavily pale in comparison to the historic counterpart , particularly vardy the front 2. The defence is as solid as any in the draft though .

With la maquina I think I've nailed the overall star feel of that front 5 and the positional interchange capabilities are spot on.

I feel like I am two players away from having as good a recreation as possible in the modern pool of players .

Henry , bale , Córdoba , chiellini , heinze are all as good a swap as I could have done and would undoubtedly be able to play the way that river plate side did .

 

[Ecstatic]

 

[Deleted member 101472]

Example of Rooney tracking back and putting in defensive work ala Moreno



Bit more defensive work and his passing range explored here



Rooney headers, a fine quality of
Morenos



Rooney dribbling

 

[harms]

I just feel that it's a heresy to compare a player whose understanding of the game was second to none to a player that even at his peak required the whole team to be built around him, compensating for his lack of tactical awareness (it's probably why their relationship with Benitez are very distant, Rafa is obsessed with tactics and Gerrard never understood what's going on around him but compensated it, for the most of his career, with his ridiculous energy level)

It's like comparing Shia Labeouf to Albert Einstein - they share some similarities too, but one is arguably the finest mind in the history of mankind and the other one is just some guy with his tongue stuck out, and in the end it's all that matters.

 

[Deleted member 101472]

And finally Rooney smoking and drinking . The ideal charro Moreno replacement

 

[harms]

Can you provide an actual link to this Sir Bobby's quote? Google didn't help.

Now, Sacchi:
Arrigo Sacchi never had much faith in marquee players.A dispute with Marco van Basten was the major factor in the Italians departure from AC Milan in 1991 and, as National coach, he had a notoriously strained relationship with Roberto Baggio. Of Steven Gerrard and his role at Liverpool, he is equally suspicious. "When I was director of football at Real Madrid I had to evaluate the players coming through the youth ranks" he said. "We had some who were very good footballers. They had technique, they had athleticism, they had drive, they were hungry. But they lacked what I call knowing-how-to-play-football. They lacked decision making. They lacked positioning.They didn't have the subtle sensitivity of football: how a player should move within the collective. And for many, I wasn't sure they were going to learn. You see, strenght, passion, technique, athleticism, all of these are very important. But they are a means to an end, not an end in itself. They help you reach your goal, which is putting your talent at the service of the team and, by doing this, making both of you and the team greater. In situations like that, I just have to say, Gerrard's a great footballer, but perhaps not a great player."



Benitez, who managed him at his peak:
"Hamsik is very important because he slots in at the right time but Gonzalo Higuain also does well to create space for him," Benitez told Sky Sport Italia.

"Is Hamsik like Gerrard? They are different players.

"Hamsik doesn't have Gerrard's strength but he does have more tactical intelligence."

Benitez is not the first coach to question Gerrard's tactical nous with former Italian national team boss Arrigo Sacchi having once claimed that although the Liverpool skipper has all the physical attributes required to be a footballer, he does not 'have the subtle sensitivity of football' to be a 'great player'.



A nice article about the matter

It’s telling that throughout his career, Gerrard at his best is epitomised in the comeback; the Champion’s League Final in Istanbul, F.A Cup Final against West Ham in 2006, the memorable goal at Anfield against Olympiakos, even his recent double against Hungary at Wembley. This is the Gerrard conundrum; capable of truly astounding acts, seeming at times to drag his team through to impossible heights, but ultimately accomplished in a cauldron where the need to comeback presents no pressure.

 

[Ecstatic]

@harms has launched the mission Gerrard bashing

Regarding the quote, I found it on Twitter: maybe a fake.

You prefer Iniesta but I think it isn't easy to present a player who scored less goals than Xavi in his career

 

[Gio]

I don't fully agree with the Gerrard criticism. Certainly there's an intelligence gap there, but Charlton was a fairly unique player difficult to replicate within this pool. And when that pool is further limited to the English, it's got to be either him or Frank. I know those players never really get a fair gig on here, but they're not the poorest replicas in the draft by a long way. The two gaps for me are the relative absence of Moore's vision and passing range from the defensive line and the grizzle of Stiles. Hargreaves is okay there and had some good spells in his career, but ideally you'd want a purist in that job. Again that may just be as far as this team can go within the limitations of the theme. The overall feel of Brwned's remake is very true to the original - not just the nationality but the qualities of the players .

 

[Enigma_87]

I don't fully agree with the Gerrard criticism. Certainly there's an intelligence gap there, but Charlton was a fairly unique player difficult to replicate within this pool. And when that pool is further limited to the English, it's got to be either him or Frank. I know those players never really get a fair gig on here, but they're not the poorest replicas in the draft by a long way. The two gaps for me are the relative absence of Moore's vision and passing range from the defensive line and the grizzle of Stiles. Hargreaves is okay there and had some good spells in his career, but ideally you'd want a purist in that job. Again that may just be as far as this team can go within the limitations of the theme. The overall feel of Brwned's remake is very true to the original - not just the nationality but the qualities of the players .

Ditto. Brwned went with English players and given the pool Gerrard is not a bad choice.

 

[harms]

And when that pool is further limited to the English, it's got to be either him or Frank

Well, that's the thing - it's not in the draft rules, it's a self restriction. So I don't discount foreign alternatives when I'm thinking about how I would've ideally recreated that team.

If Brwned would've managed to recreate his team almost perfectly (say, 8 or 9/10 on EAP's scale) I would've considered this nationality thing as a further bonus, making it a 9 or 10/10 replica. But it only works as a bonus, not as an excuse, at least for me. You don't shot yourself in the foot and then complain that you can't run a maraphone

 

[Enigma_87]

Well, that's the thing - it's not in the draft rules, it's a self restriction. So I don't discount foreign alternatives when I'm thinking about how I would've ideally recreated that team.

If Brwned would've managed to recreate his team almost perfectly (say, 8 or 9/10 on EAP's scale) I would've considered this nationality thing as a further bonus, making it a 9 or 10/10 replica. But it only works as a bonus, not as an excuse, at least for me. You don't shot yourself in the foot and then complain that you can't run a maraphone

Charlton is pretty unique player, who do you have in mind as his replacement within Brwned setup?

 

[Deleted member 101472]

managed to win this despite zero questions being asked of my team.

Il take that as a perfect remake and there's no need to play the semi finals lads

 

[harms]

Charlton is pretty unique player, who do you have in mind as his replacement within Brwned setup?

Iniesta ticks the most important boxes for me, while you can make up for the lack of graft with the rest of the midfield. He is the genuine world-class big game player, playmaker, selfless, tactically flawless and elevating everyone around him on the next level, plus his stats on the international stage are actually much more impressive than over the whole season (although still a little short of Charlton, obviously). He also improved the defensive side of his massively in the last few years.

 

[harms]

managed to win this despite zero questions being asked of my team.

Il take that as a perfect remake and there's no need to play the semi finals lads

You're welcome for my crusade against the Starfish

 

[Deleted member 101472]

You're welcome for my crusade against the Starfish

I'm just glad you proved that quote from sir bobby himself wasn't necessarily true .

Overrated player taking the place of arguably England's greatest ever player ? Doesn't work for me either tbf.

Would liked to have seen Robbie fowler in this England team

 

[Joga Bonito]

Well, we just have different views on Gerrard's mentality then. Like you said, Sir Bobby's lack of tactical baggage and absolutely unique selflessness were as important for the team as were his playmaking or goalscoring. But I don't see Gerrard as a selfless player - quite the opposite in fact. He always wants to be in the spotlight, be it his countless shots from the distance or his trademark Hollywood balls. Don't get me wrong, he was a very talented player, obviously, and sometimes those risks paid off, which granted him a completely undeserved reputation of a great leader and a team player. He isn't called Steve Me for no reason.

Fair enough, although I wouldn't quite label him selfish and I'd say it was the burden of almost single-handedly carrying Liverpool at times, which more or less placed the onus on him to try to force things through etc. He never quite struck me as a C.Ronaldo type player who does it for personal glory or accolades etc. Or even an egoistic cnut like Matthäus. Eurghh, enough of defending the Starfish. I do agree that in terms of intelligence on the pitch and decision-making he is miles away from Sir Bobby Charlton though.

And another thing, which I mentioned but maybe I should've highlighted it more. Sir Bobby was both the orchestrator and the water carrier (in Russian we have the saying "carrying the piano" which shares the same meaning but is probably more apt to the orchestrator tag), which made him one of the most unique GOAT players.

Agreed with that, although I'd say more of a selfless team player as opposed to water carrier, which sounds a bit disparaging

 

[Enigma_87]

Iniesta ticks the most important boxes for me, while you can make up for the lack of graft with the rest of the midfield. He is the genuine world-class big game player, playmaker, selfless, tactically flawless and elevating everyone around him on the next level, plus his stats on the international stage are actually much more impressive than over the whole season (although still a little short of Charlton, obviously). He also improved the defensive side of his massively in the last few years.

I'd probably prefer a bit more graft in the player especially when it's the 1966 team that Brwned is replicating. In the final game he and Beckenbauer pretty much cancelled each other out. I don't think Iniesta will do such a job. I'd even prefer Modric before Iniesta to be fair, although he can't match Charlton's attacking contribution and goals like in the SF against Portugal.

 

[Gio]

I'd probably prefer a bit more graft in the player especially when it's the 1966 team that Brwned is replicating. In the final game he and Beckenbauer pretty much cancelled each other out. I don't think Iniesta will do such a job. I'd even prefer Modric before Iniesta to be fair, although he can't match Charlton's attacking contribution and goals like in the SF against Portugal.

Aye. I'm not sure about Iniesta firstly in terms of goal threat. There's a big gulf there - Iniesta doesn't have that ability to rip the net from 30 yards of either foot (unlike both Gerrard and Lampard for instance). Secondly as you say, the blueprint is the 1966 World Cup and Charlton's role in the final there has to be reflected in some capacity. While Iniesta has that selflessness and works hard, I find it difficult to envisage that back-tracking job which again would be more akin to the typical off-the-ball diligence Gerrard and Lampard excelled in.

But yes stature, intelligence and position work in Iniesta's favour there.

 

[Physiocrat]

Again another random suggestion but how about Veron for Charlton? Passing range, hell of a shot, dynamic and could put his foot in. Thinking about it seems that him and Totti are the most versatile picks.

 

[Gio]

Might be the best suggestion yet. He generally played a fair bit deeper, but the blend of their various qualities aligns well.

 

[Ecstatic]

Again another random suggestion but how about Veron for Charlton? Passing range, hell of a shot, dynamic and could put his foot in. Thinking about it seems that him and Totti are the most versatile picks.

Yes, Veron or Ballack were better options than Iniesta.

 

[Physiocrat]

Yes, Veron or Ballack were better options than Iniesta.

Actually Ballack is a great shout. A more technical version of Gerrard.

 

[Joga Bonito]

Say if it's an all-time pool, who do you guys reckon would be the closest 'replica' of Sir Bobby? The Spaniard Luisito Suarez in his Barca incarnation would actually be a good choice I feel - plenty of goalscoring ability, big game player, playmaking, skillful & elegant, tactical nous, versatility etc.

 

[Ecstatic]

Say if it's an all-time pool, who do you guys reckon would be the closest 'replica' of Sir Bobby? The Spaniard Luisito Suarez in his Barca incarnation would actually be a good choice I feel - plenty of goalscoring ability, big game player, playmaking, skillful & elegant, tactical nous, versatility etc.

Maybe one of the following players:

Rivelino, Laudrup, Pedernera, Mazzola, Francescoli, Netzer, Overath, Schiaffino, Platini

 

[Enigma_87]

Say if it's an all-time pool, who do you guys reckon would be the closest 'replica' of Sir Bobby? The Spaniard Luisito Suarez in his Barca incarnation would actually be a good choice I feel - plenty of goalscoring ability, big game player, playmaking, skillful & elegant, tactical nous, versatility etc.

Di Stefano

 

[Invictus]

Di Stefano

Yep, Di Stéfano is the obvious and superior choice in terms of being an overall midfield general. Didi is another compelling option, though he lacked some of the more forceful characteristics of Sir Bobby and Di Stéfano in terms of bloody relentlessness and tireless running ability (wasn't a scrub to be fair, but the other two were the gold standards). Zizinho's one who was very complete in terms of being an overall midfield general too - 30 goals in 50 odd games for Brazil (including a record 17 in the Copa América), very good passer (not as refined as Charlton, though), great defensive awareness and workrate, exquisite dribbler, and mega versatile. Probably the best comp. for Charlton in terms of South American players outside of Di Stéfano. For European players, I think Valentino Mazzola is another good candidate outside of Suárez. Never got the chance to fully showcase his ability on a global stage, but he had similar talisman-type qualities for Torino, and developed into a more complete and defensively aware midfielder with experience.

 

[Deleted member 101472]

from what ive read of him, pedernera would be a good fit too, especially if we are saying di stefano would be good, as he wasnt deemed as good as pedernera by some

 

[Joga Bonito]

Di Stefano

Yep, Di Stéfano is the obvious and superior choice in terms of being an overall midfield general. Didi is another compelling option, though he lacked some of the more forceful characteristics of Sir Bobby and Di Stéfano in terms of bloody relentlessness and tireless running ability (wasn't a scrub to be fair, but the other two were the gold standards). Zizinho's one who was very complete in terms of being an overall midfield general too - 30 goals in 50 odd games for Brazil (including a record 17 in the Copa América), very good passer (not as refined as Charlton, though), great defensive awareness and workrate, exquisite dribbler, and mega versatile. Probably the best comp. for Charlton in terms of South American players outside of Di Stéfano. For European players, I think Valentino Mazzola is another good candidate outside of Suárez. Never got the chance to fully showcase his ability on a global stage, but he had similar talisman-type qualities for Torino, and developed into a more complete and defensively aware midfielder with experience.

Not overly sold on di Stefano as I feel he was overly dominant and more of a general as opposed to Charlton who was more or less, free of ego and someone of a more accommodating nature. Even then, it's only fair to mention that di Stefano's ego and general-like attitude went hand in hand with his remarkable will power and relentless winning mentality. In terms of replacing Charlton's all-round play and playmaking ability he's a great shout though, albeit not necessarily possessing the same grace, pace or ability on the wings etc.

Mazzola and Zizinho are fantastic shouts too, esp Zizinho.

 

[harms]

Zizinho would've been my first choice to replace Charlton from an open pool