Remake Draft SF | Tuppet vs harms

Please vote for the better remake of the classical set-up


  • Total voters
    6
  • Poll closed .

Balu

Der Fußballgott
Joined
Dec 2, 2010
Messages
15,102
Location
Munich
Supports
Bayern Munich
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 Tuppet

New Additions(SF):
Alexis Sanchez
replaces Di Maria to play Jair da Costa (Tornante) role. Now there is nothing particularly wrong with Di Maria's fit in the tactic as a whole, as a right forward who tracks back he fits well in the tactic. Alexis Sanchez however also resembles Jair more closely as a player than Di Maria. Like Jair, Alexis is right footed, right forward who can play centrally as well. Like Jair, Sanchez is lightning fast, a great dribbler and made like a bull. This is a classic example where the upgrade is not necessarily a tactical one, but in resembling the original player more closely, while also fitting the tactic neatly. Jair played like a right sided target man, while he did his fair share of tracking back, his major role was to be a target for Suarez's pin point passes and tracking back somewhat, Sanchez is more or less perfect for this role.

Mascherano replaces Kante to play the defensive midfielder role. There is nothing particularly wrong with Kante in that role, but Mascherano as one of the finest defensive midfielder of current generation provides an upgrade. While he is much more cultured on the ball as well, he doesn’t have to master off the ball movement and one-touch passing in this system. All we’re asking him to do is stick to the opposing playmaker and make him pay every time he touches the ball. I have faith he could handle that.

Philosophy/Ideology of tactical set-up

Defensive:
Catenaccio
predicated itself on always having a spare man in defense. It accomplished this by using man-marking; each Inter player knew who he was meant to be keeping tabs on in his half of the field. The spare man was the sweeper, for those Inter teams, Armando Picchi, cleaning up anyone who slipped their marker long enough to provide a threat.

Offensive:
“In attack, all the players knew what I wanted: vertical football at great speed, with no more than three passes to get to the opponent’s box.”


“A small number of short, very quick passes to get to the opposition’s goal in as little time as possible. There is almost no place for dribbling. It’s a tool, not a system. The ball always moves further, and more quickly, when there isn’t a player behind it.”

- Herrera


These quotes from Il Mago himself gives us a fair idea, of how the attacking system is supposed to work.
Stay deep, soak the pressure, win the ball back in their half and launch the ball forward with speed and directness. Directness is the key here and this along with the ability to play the counter attacking system has weighed heavily in my picks.

Style -
Counter attacking, Direct, Long passes. Defend deep as a team and employ a lot of time wasting when leading.

Defense:

Defensive line -
Deep. Di Stéfano described Picchi to Lowe as - “one of those sweepers who played so deep that, if there was a bit of fog and you thought you’d gone past all of them, another one would appear. ‘Where did that guy come from? Are they playing with 12, or what?

This is exactly how I want my sweeper (Carvalho) to play.

Marking - Strictly man marking with a free sweeper.

Off the ball - Drop deep to own half, with each man sticking to his player, while the free sweeper stays further back to provide last line of defense. Win the ball with tough tackling.

On the ball - Pump the ball into the box with long passes from deep and direct runs.

Midfield:

Midfield's roles are specialized, Pirlo is the main conductor, his job is to get the ball to forwards and onrushing Marcelo, with his impeccable long range passing. Mascherano's role is to often man mark the opposition playmaker and tackle everything that moves. Silva provide extra creativity from the left, can go either to the middle or wide left. Finally Sanchez's role is to own the right wing, while he is more of a right forward, he would track back relentlessly to provide support all over the wing.

Attack:

Attack is spear headed by Ronaldo and supported by Suarez. Two main attributes we're looking from our attack are lethal finishing - to finish off any little half chance we create - and direct strong running toward opposition defense, to start and finish counters. Ronaldo and Suarez fits the bill perfectly both are fast, great finishers and can create their chances as well.


More on team and tactic:

Much like the grande Inter our team is built on the principles of a team effort and strong work ethic. Organization is of prime importance whereby the team set out in the shape of 4 levels. These are: first level of a sweeper, two/four defenders depending upon the possession, five/three midfielders and two forwards.

The forward line of 2 is amorphous in which Suarez plays a vital role, that of the ‘fantasista’. Blessed with a great touch, gorgeous technique and finishing to match, Suarez is the man responsible for netting every half-chance, but equally importantly, setting up his more advanced partner. He is paired with the lethal Ronaldo, the best forward in the draft, this would be a terrifying partnership. In the midfield, the architect named Andrea Pirlo is the playmaker responsible for finding the men upfront, while Silva providing support from left and taking playmaking duties if Pirlo is too deep or marked. Mascherano would provide the muscle and energy in the midfield.

But true wonders of this team and Herrera’s system are the two players on the wings. On the right, Di Maria plays the right wing forward role which he played for Mourinho's slick counter attacking machine in Real Madrid and now plays for PSG. His role is to charge forward whenever possession was won. Di Maria would be the outlet for Pirlo, Silva, Mascherano and Carvalho whenever they won the ball. Of these, Pirlo & Silva are particularly accomplished passers known for their range. This perfectly complements Sanchez's ability to drive forward.

On the left we have Marcelo, a wing back who loves to attack and go forward at every chance, especially to utilize the space vacated from Silva, when he cuts in. Marcelo and Sanchez are the two players which provid balance and thrust to this machine. They make sure that the team stayed organized with men behind the ball when the opposition had the ball, but also that this does not impede them when deciding to go forward.

How defensive was catenaccio ? -
Debate has also enveloped the nature of Catenaccio. Several contemporaries say it was more constructive than its reputation suggests. Herrera claimed his system was misunderstood, because others had copied it and left out several attacking principles. This is supported by Mazzola, who believes the misconception is rooted in the European campaigns that served to establish Inter’s notoriety. “When I hear about Inter playing catenaccio, I have to say we played about six matches with catenaccio and 40 matches with attacking football,” Mazzola told FIFA.com. “I remember my team-mates Picchi and Guarneri, two centre-backs, who during San Siro home games could spend 60 minutes looking into the stands, trying to spot a girl to take out that evening, because the opposition only played in their half. But then, when we played abroad – and I guess this was a mistake – we didn’t feel very comfortable and secure, and stayed back more.”

He added: “We had five attacking players in the side, six if you include Facchetti, who used to get forward a lot, something that no one else did at the time. It’s true that we sometimes employed a very defensive system away from home, but we regularly played 4-2-4, and everyone worked really hard.”

Our squad has the right amount of attacking flair in Ronaldo, Suarez, Sanchez, Pirlo, and Silva to adhere to the attacking principles of Grande Inter.
 
Original-Inter-formation-tactics.png
Inter-Remade-formation-tactics.png


Grande Inter....................................................... ........... ................/..........................Tuppet's Modern Remake
 
Team harms

Ajax 1995 recreation

20-jaar-geleden.jpg


Philosophy/Ideology of tactical set-up


Louis Van Gaal is well-known and often ridiculed for insisting that above everything his players should comply to his philosophy. He is probably the greatest and the craziest control freak of modern football. It's not surprising that the most adventurous managers of today, Bielsa and Guardiola both mentioned Van Gaal's Ajax as their greatest inspiration. Sure, it's easy to remember him by his failure at United, but before that he had a great and entertaining career, which started with his arguably greatest achievement - Champions League win with Ajax in 1995.

Ajax of that time is probably the least individualistic team of the last two decades. Make no mistake, it was filled with great and skillful players, and when we look back to that team we see lots of names of today's greats, who moved on after Ajax's success in Europe and had outstanding careers abroad. But all of them were just pawns in Van Gaal's game who moved them around and would've sacrificed them without second thought if that benefitted the team.

That side had a very strict frame, every player knew his place and how he was supposed to move in different situations. But make no mistake, like in a well oiled machine, it's strict nature was camouflaged by the synergy between the players and their perfect understanding of the manager's philosophy. In fact, they looked so fluid and unpredictable to neutral spectators that many compared them to Michel's total football, while in fact the fundamental ideas between these two systems are completely opposite (later that led to the infamous conflict between Van Gaal and Cruyff)

Style

Possession is the first thing that Van Gaal tries to implicate in his teams. If the team dominates possession it's bound to create more chances in front of the opposition's goal, at the same time limiting any possible threat to their own. But you shouldn't compare this to static and impotent possession of United last season, Van Gaal's Ajax was incredibly direct and positive.

If you plan to dominate the possession it's always good to have players whose task is to stretch the opposition's defence, creating space for your other players. Wingers in that Ajax side were very much tactical figures (despite right-footed Overmars being essentially an inverted winger on the left) who rarely cut inside and mostly opened up the space for more central players with their constant moving.

Defense

In 1995 Ajax fielded one of the most interesting defensive set-ups ever created. On the paper, it was a three man defence with a defensive midfielder dropping back in need. But then you have to look at the individual roles of the players to see how revolutionary Van Gaal's ideas were. Van der Sar resurrected the role of a sweeper-keeper, which almost made him an additional outfield player; Danny Blind was a no-nonsense centre back with above average vision and a tendency to join the attack when he felt that it would be productive; two fullbacks, who mostly stayed out wide, unlike the catenaccio's sidebacks for example, and were capable of supporting the attack and the defence equally good.

It's all about the spatial awareness for Louis Van Gaal - and the fluid three/four (or even five if you include Van der Sar) defensive line adapted brilliantly to the flow of the game.

Van Gaal is also known for his love of ball-playing defenders. He thinks that central midfielders are positioned too advanced and don't have neither time or space to orchestrate the game, so the actual playmakers in his team were Danny Blind, Frank de Boer and Frank Rijkaard.

Midfield

In midfield we have a pretty straightforward diamond. It's hard to separate Rijkaard from the defence or Litmanen from the attacking unit though, as they have a more complex roles. Davids and Seedorf play as a classic box-to-box midfielders, both are covering the opposition's wingers while defending and both capable of bursting forward runs to confuse the opposition and to finish the chance. Seedorf was slightly more attacking/playmaking, while Davids was a little more defensive, although both were pretty versatile and all-rounded. Rijkaard is responsible for the first pass, he is the closest thing this midfield has to a traditional playmaker. He also drops back to the defence, like I described earlier, and he has one of the most crucial roles in this system. Litmanen was as much a forward as he was a midfielder, often scoring as much as the centre forward. It was his spatial awareness and incredible off the ball movement that separated him from other great №10's - and Muller, who played a slightly modified role for the same manager, is a great fit here

Attack

2 wingers and an all-rounded number 9 up front - it's probably the most traditional part of this very unique team. Kluivert was the perfect choice for leading the line - great in build-up, calm finisher and not overly egoistic, he scored lots of goals himself and set them up for Litmanen and co. Overmars and George were the architypical wingers, mostly staying on the wings, stretching the defence and providing crosses; although, like every one else, they were capable of changing their game pattern and cutting in to score goals - especially the right-footed left winger Overmars. George played a little more conservative role - because of Reiziger's defensive approach he had to cover more ground off the ball.
 
3YgWv84.png


Player Roles

Víctor Valdés (Edwin van der Sar) - a sweeper-keeper; good distribution and proactive playing style

Éric Abidal (Frank de Boer) - complete left back; good ball-playing passing skills (Abidal is underrated in this aspect, but de Boer was better), equally capable of going forward and tucking in as the additional centre back

Jérôme Boateng (Danny Blind) - more of a libero than a sweeper; A great centre-back, a genuine playmaker from the deep and also capable of joining the attacks further forward. Boateng is, by a fine margin, my favorite centre-back in he game today, he is built like a tank but he also was a key player for Guardiola's possession based team. He is a clear upgrade on Badstuber in terms of quality and, most importantly, he is also capable of some goals from the open play, which is something Blind was known to do and Badstuber wasn't

César Azpilicueta (Michael Reiziger) - at this point of his career, Reiziger played a defensive right back - later, playing for Barcelona, he will become a more conservative centre/side back, but in Ajax he rarely tucked in and played more like Azpilicueta plays today (when he is playing on the right). Decent on the ball, both were very fast and great athletes, I really don't see any other modern player emulating Reiziger to this extent

Javi Martínez (Frank Rijkaard) - Rijkaard is one of the most unique players of all time and a clear stand out as a GOAT defensive midfielder. But for this hybrid role of a holding midfielder/deep-lying playmaker/central defender I think Martínez is a great fit. He played as a central defender for Bielsa, Guardiola and Del Bosque and proved himself a world-class defensive midfielder at Bayern's treble winning season (look at his master-class when they destroyed Barcelona over the two legs)

Michael Essien (Edgar Davids) - Davids wasn't a complete package like he was at Juve at this point and he focused mainly on the defensive side of the game; his enormous energy levels made him the engine in Van Gaal's midfield, he ran all 90 minutes and never stopped. Essien was a very similar player back for Chelsea. Not a holding midfielder like some think of him (it was Makelele), he was a great all-rounder - energetic and combative midfielder with accurate passing and great shot on him. He has slightly inferior ball-playing skills (although he is quite underrated here), but overall I can't think of a better replacement for Davids

Clarence Seedorf (Clarence Seedorf) - :rolleyes: №1. Freakish physicality and brilliant technique, vision and intelligence - I think you all know Seedorf's playing style

Thomas Müller (Jari Litmanen) - already explained in the tactics. Der Raumdeuter was chosen by Van Gaal himself to replicate Litmanen's role in his Bayern side. World-class (maybe the best in the world today) off the ball movement, great work rate and the absence of specified position, they both play as a midfielder/forward and are allowed tactical freedom, which isn't something you'll see often in Van Gaal's teams.

Luís Nani (Marc Overmars) - When playing on the left they share similar qualities. Outstanding pace (he wasn't much slower than Valencia on the other side), brilliant ball-control, flair and trickery. His performance against Bayern Munich was one of the best individual performances from a United player in the modern times and for a few years he was as good as any winger in the world (but, sadly, haven't fullfilled his insane potential). Incredibly productive, versatile and, like this Euro already showed to us, even capable of playing up front (and being the best player in his team so far). And I'm happy to finally offload Walcott, who I am not a fan of, even if he had lot of resemblances to Overmars' playing style

Patrick Kluivert (Patrick Kluivert) - :rolleyes: №2. A complete forward. You can argue that he comes a little short compared to the true greats of the game, but it's hard to think of more equally all-rounded modern forwards

Kuba Błaszczykowski (Finidi George) - George was probably the least impressive footballer in that Ajax side - which is highlighted by his inclusion in the Mirror's "Worst CL winners XI" (incredibly harsh decision). He reminds me very much of Kanchelskis, who is, sadly, unavailable in this draft - but Kuba, hardworking and versatile side midfielder/winger is probably the best man to take on George's responsibilities in the team.

Specific Tactical Manoeuvres

davids-and-de-boer-help-1.png
davids-and-de-boer-help-2.png

ajax-without-ball-2.png

Rijkaard plays the ball to R. de Boer (right box-to-box, a role where he was rotated with Seedorf) who wanders off his marker, turns and look for a forward ball.


With George keeping the Milan defence stretched, a pass through to Kluivert is on the cards. de Boer follows his pass and looks to run between the centre and full-back.


Kluivert turns and returns the favour to de Boer who, with the outside of his right-boot, places it into the net.
Something quite well-known to the United fans, for Ajax it worked brilliantly, for United it made us unbearable to watch.
When faced with doubling-up, switching the ball quickly and directly can lead to a team finding an area of the pitch with no opposition player in. Such tactical nuances were a distinct part of this Ajax team. This is an obvious and logical tactical ploy; however, some Dutch people did not find this logical style of play attractive or in keeping with Dutch flair – as it often meant that talented players like Marc Overmars (or Luis Nani, equally capable of beating his marker one on one) were instructed to play a pass instead of attempting to pass his marker.

From the game against AC Milan in 1995 CL final:

When the front two of Massaro and Simone pressed the Ajax back line they would press the two nearest Ajax central defenders. So if the ball went to De Boer on the left, Massaro would move out to press him as Simone would cover Blind in the central position and leave the far side central defender open. This wasn't a bad idea to prevent Ajax from progressing up the pitch and closing down spaces near the ball together, but a problem arose once the ball went back to Van Der Sar.

Van Der Sar would simply switch the ball out to the completely unmarked Reiziger who would move up the field with the ball. The 2 AC Milan forwards simply wouldnt shift across the pitch to pressure the ball again or even move towards the center to protect against penetration and assist in isolating the build up. Both Massaro and Simone stayed on their men on the far side of the field.

 
aSnqTUf.png
LgOcXZV.png


Ajax 1995......................................................................................./.......................harms' modern remake
 
Really great replicas with two players who just don't fit: Pirlo (as has been mentioned numerous times) and Nani- he was terrible on the left wing, he just dawdled. I'm actually a Nani fan but he's three times the player on the right.
 
Nani- he was terrible on the left wing, he just dawdled. I'm actually a Nani fan but he's three times the player on the right.
Yeah, absolutely terrible


(that assist at 4:00 :drool: One of my all-time favorites)

He was more consistent on the right, but some of his best form with us (2009/10) coincided with Valencia being absolutely massive on the right and Nani was moved to the left due to his versatility. He certainly wasn't terrible there

The Overmars' curse, every player who tries to emulate him gets criticized :lol:
 
Last edited:
Best of luck @harms , thats a really neat remake you have made and I don't really have any criticisms apart from the minor Nani point. Having lost my very first draft game because I played Nani on the left, I do have some reservations about him there. This is a minor point though, but I would like to know your reasoning behind selecting Nani there, and not say Hazard or Reus, who it seem are more productive/consistent on the left. I could totally see Walcott and Overmars resemblance, esp speed and directness, but why Nani and not some other winger ?

Re: Pirlo, I think at this point, you are either convinced or not that Pirlo can play the part. I'll add the post describing my point of view regarding Pirlo/Suarez similarity and Pirlo's fitness for the role from the previous game threads. In short I think, the most important quality that I was looking to reproduce for both tactical & Player similarity reasons was long range passing from deep, capability of raking long balls to on rushing wing backs, ability to play in a defensive counter based setup, directness, flair and dribbling. IMHO there is not a single player in the draft who ticks all the boxes for me to the extent Pirlo does Not Xavi, not Iniesta, not Veron.

With Xavi I have the problem of directness and flair, he may be a fantastic playmaker, but at his peak was always playing in dominant midfields, was a much better short passer of the ball and was much less direct in his approach. A player of Xavi's quality can surely adapt, but why bother with that when you already have another player of similar quality without all these problems.

Iniesta is probably the most similar player to Suarez by his own admission. But I think here I am choosing a better tactical fit over a better player remake. Iniesta has never played in catenaccio like formations, his long passing is also not that spectacular from what I've seen, he is much more effective in playing beautiful through balls and key passes in opposition box than playing pressure releasing balls from deep. He is much better dribbler and if given chance he would probably adapt to catenaccio much like Luisto himself, but we don't know that and he also never played in a tactic as negative and cynical as Catenaccio.

Veron is the most versatile fit and as suggested by some very knowledgeable posters would fit Luisto well, I just don't rate him as much as Pirlo. I think he has good long passing and dribbling but not at the Luisto & Pirlo standard, I might be wrong though. In my mind I chose, more peak stats over more roundness. However even if you believe that Veron is a better fit, that can't be more than marginal.

In the end I don't think I'll replace Pirlo even if I go forward, in my mind he is the best player for Suarez role (notice not the best Suarez remake may be, but the best player for that role in tactic) in this pool, again might be wrong and would love to listen to the reasons for that.
 
Not much in this, but kluivert and seedorf being in there still leans me towards tuppet because hes had to put proper thought into all 11 players whereas those two are so blatantly obvious that you cant really score them. Nani a definite upgrade on walcott and we are basing the picks on their skillset and ability to play the position. Nani is, for me, 10x the player walcott ever could be ( admittedly, a personal agenda, if he wasnt fast hed have a normal job like the rest of us)
 
This is a minor point though, but I would like to know your reasoning behind selecting Nani there, and not say Hazard or Reus, who it seem are more productive/consistent on the left. I could totally see Walcott and Overmars resemblance, esp speed and directness, but why Nani and not some other winger ?
I thought that Walcott was the closest one stylistically but he got incredibly harsh reception in the first two games and I gave up on him. If so many see him as a bad fit it's probably me who is wrong here.

Overmars' qualities that were important to this team:
- Pace
- Right foot
- Close control
- Directness
- Pure wing play (a tactical figure to stretch the defense)
- Finishing

We all know how important is a player's working foot to Van Gaal. How many players get their debut just because of it. Overmars was right-footed, so that's the first requirement.

Overmars had an interesting role - first of all, he was an archetypical winger, providing the width on the left like George did on the right, creating space for Litmanen, Davids, Seedorf and De Boer to run into. That was his primary task and that disqualifies all modern wing-forwards (Reus, Aubameyang etc) - which is a shame, because the pool of right-footed left wingers who doesn't fall into that category is really small.

But also he had more tactical freedom than George, and he scored 10-15 goals every season (thanks to the more attacking De Boer behind him), so we need someone who can cut inside.

Plus, the first thing that you think of when you try to replicate Overmars is his pace and directness. He is one of the fastest players in history and he used his pace so well! That's when the likes of Hazard and Ribery are disqualified, they tend to slow down the play with their dribble and the show playmaking tendencies, which is the opposite of Overmar's game.

When I tried to make an ideal team before the beginning of the draft, it was between Walcott and Nani for me, but I opted for the former because of his pace and visually similar style of play. But his quality was questioned and it was obvious that literally no one rated him - so I went with my back-up. Nani isn't much slower, only Valencia was faster than him, he is a better dribbler and a player, plus he provides quality assists from the left too (that pass to Rooney vs Milan :drool:).
 
Not much in this, but kluivert and seedorf being in there still leans me towards tuppet because hes had to put proper thought into all 11 players whereas those two are so blatantly obvious that you cant really score them
:lol: M'kay
 
Can't think of many faults in Tuppet's team too, the teams at this point are very similar to their originals. Pirlo is the obvious talking point and he isn't ideal Suarez impersonator but to be fair there hardly is one in this pool. I'd probably rate him as a 7/10 for this pick but Tuppet have done everything he could here.

I would've picked someone different for Mazzola as well but I'm biased towards the racist cnut
 
Well come on , you're asking people to debate whether Patrick kluivert and Clarence seedorf can replace Patrick kluivert and Clarence seedorf

We were asked to recreate the teams as close as possible, I did it within the rules and you voted against me on the basis of me picking an ideal replacements? It's the conversation you should've had with the draft master before the beginning of the draft, now you're creating a new "rule" for yourself and judging me ex post facto. I actually supported the idea of banning the use of original players but the committee made a decision (and explained it numerous times) and I went with it.

Also, this
JhaoWft.png
 
We were asked to recreate the teams as close as possible, I did it within the rules and you voted against me on the basis of me picking an ideal replacements? It's the conversation you should've had with the draft master before the beginning of the draft, now you're creating a new "rule" for yourself and judging me ex post facto. I actually supported the idea of banning the use of original players but the committee made a decision (and explained it numerous times) and I went with it.

Also, this
JhaoWft.png

It was a case of the more I thought about it the less fair it seemed , particularly as you progressed.

You clearly have the knack for identifying excellent replacements ( Muller for Litmanen being a great example ) just would have liked to see you mix it up with those two players .
 
It was a case of the more I thought about it the less fair it seemed , particularly as you progressed.
I still think that your logic is flawed (what is fair in this draft? when one gets Sacchi's 4-4-2 Milan and the other one the Dream Team, where every player is a difficult challenge) and we should play by the rules that were articulated by the draft master at the beginning of the draft but it's your right to think differently.
 
@harms the Martinez pick is genius . If not for injuries I think he would be truly in the world class bracket .

Did you consider any other right backs ?
 
Did you consider any other right backs ?
Azpi was my first choice but he got picked earlier than I thought, so I settled for Darmian. The lazy choice for replacing Reiziger would've been some RCB, like the ones who were picked instead of Burgnich or Gentile but I feel that Reiziger was different. Barzagli wouldn't have looked out of place there but his approach is a little different. Reiziger playing as a CB and RCB for Barca later shouldn't count here and for Ajax he played very much like the modern defensive fullback. Those are a rarity today and Azpilicueta is the most notable example, plus he matches him in stature and pace.

Yeah, Martinez is fantastic and is a no-brainer for a Rijkaard's replacement.
 
Probably the lowest turnout in a draft game I've seen. Anyway its time for bed here, so I'll give this thread a last bump and share a couple of detailed posts on players from last match thread.

More on Mazzola and Suarez -

sqcM3iG.jpg


Sandro Mazzola role and style -


thesefootballtimes said:
Sandro, despite his touch and vision, was a bustling forward, perfect at defending from the front as Herrera demanded. He buzzed around in the inside right position, finding space and turning possession over. Sandro, unlike the man he barely knew but revered with all his instincts, was a warrior. He had to work to become a legend and fulfil his undoubted quality.

thesefootballtimes said:
Mazzola was to push on and mould himself into one of the most effective forwards in the game. In many ways, he was an early Kenny Dalglish; capable of using his body to shield possession and spotting passes before most others on the field. A goal every four games for the club is testament to the finishing and technical qualities that ensured he successfully emulated his father.

thefalse9 said:
Blessed with sensational touch and explosive pace and finishing to match, Mazzola was the man responsible for netting every half-chance

From these quotes we get a picture, of a bustling, warrior like deep forward, who had great technique and finishing instincts. Here's what he has to say, about who he considered his modern day equivalent -


Sandro Mazzola said:
It is always difficult to make comparisons to players these days, because this is a faster, more tactical game today. After all, in the old days, attackers were all technicians, everyone knew how to dribble and beat an opponent. Now, sometimes it seems that it's enough just be fast, to just launch the ball forward and run after it. I must say, however, that I see a little of myself in Cristiano Ronaldo. Every time I see one of his fakes, I say, 'I also used to do that!' At the time we were not as fast, but I had quick feet, thought quickly and was certainly not lacking technically. So, I was a little like the Portuguese today, who is blessed with athleticism and class.

So, we are looking for a player who positions as deep forward, who's got work rate, dribbling, finishing and creativity. Let's take these one at a time -

Position -

outsideoftheboot said:
Defensive security was not to be risked, a method that frequently left forward Sandro Mazzola and number nine Joaquin Peiro isolated at the top of the pitch.

outsideoftheboot said:
Mazzola’s role in the team was particularly tasking. A wonderfully creative player who combined a glorious touch with dangerous pace and agility, Mazzola was relied upon to bring Suarez and Picchi’s sweeping balls under control and immediately feed Peiro or take a shot on goal. Inter’s system relied upon maximum efficiency up front, and it was largely down to Mazzola to turn hopeful passes into clear-cut opportunities.

From these quotes it would seem that Mazzola was a part of 2 man forward line which was often left isolated at top. He acted both like a target man - often aimed by Picchi and Suarez - but also like a playmaker, playing a final ball to Piero. A 9.5 then, but with incredible stamina and will to win.
He was also often put on top as a lone forward in difficult away games, e.g. CL final against Celtic -


Work rate -
The combination of notoriously hard to please and a strict disciplinarian - Herrara, and a perfectionist and hard worker - Mazzola, was always going to produce scintillating displays of football on the pitch. One where technique, flair and skill meet hard work, determination, tactics and will to win. Mazzola's role in defending was not to fall back on the pitch when not with ball, but to harry defenders get the ball back, e.g. -
QweBkUdkI8Gxq.gif


Dribbling -
Mazzola was a brilliant dribbler, here's an anecdote someone shared -

In a European cup game against Vasas Budapest, he did something that put out everyone. He got into Vasas' area, with most of the defense out, went bordering two defenders, then kept the ball feinting without pause. Every teammate waited for him to pass. Alas, he did not: he went on feinting.

Vasas defenders returned. Shouts came and go. Indeed Sandro did NOT pass at all. He rounded the Vasas goal, when he felt the defender breathing on his scalp and the goalie running out, he shoot between the keeper's boot and the goalpost. Goal.

Here he is toying with defenders -
13F2cRI0lYiFZ6.gif


Finishing -
He was Inter's goto source for goals, often finishing as club's top scorer and finishing as Serie A top scorer in 1964-65 campaign -

sportskeeda said:
Sandro was no one-season wonder and he proved this when he became the Capocannoniere next season, scoring 17 goals in total and leading Internazionale to another Seria A title.

He was a stone cold one on one finisher -
6M3Yf8fH1Bmqk.gif


Creativity -
Mazzola was a beautifully creative player, so much so, that he was often preferred over the most celebrated Itallian playmaker of that time - Rivera - in the national team. There are way too many moments showing his wonderful abilities with ball and a brilliant tactical mind to gif, just check this video showing his highlights for Grande Inter -


Luis Suarez -
Now the question is can Luis Suarez imitate such a wonderful player to a high degree and the answer is a resounding yes. Suarez's dribbling esp his nutmegs are stuff of legend, He is the first player in modern era in a long time to outscore Messi and Ronaldo, He very well might become the first player to win Ballon D'or in last 8 years or so who is not named Messi or Ronaldo. On top of this, he is a brilliant team player and has incredible stamina, work ethic and will to win. In most likelihood You guys have seen enough of him to judge whether this is correct or not. But IMO he is the best player to imitate great Sandro Mazzola in this pool, he was my first choice to play this role as well.
 
On Pirlo and Suarez (Stuff mostly copied from last game thread)

Before Pirlo was a luxury player -- before the beard, the wine and the fetishization that comes with being discovered by English fans (you're not good unless they acknowledge you as such) -- he was the Geppetto of AC Milan. Pirlo is one of those players who got overrated in certain aspects of game so much that he is underrated in other aspects. Any time you select him in the draft he is instantly regarded as a defensive liability.

For example take a look at this performance -



Its clear to that there is something weird here and that is -- tackles and interceptions. He's not prancing about the field lazily, waiting to receive the ball and play his signature passes; instead, he's sprinting toward attackers, stealing passes, stopping runs, going shoulder to shoulder with rivals. Putting his body on the line, a concept so far-fetched and foreign these days.

The match is then a display of all of his skills: receiving the ball from defenders so deep that it resembles how Xabi Alonso operates. Spraying passes side to side with either foot, playing them over the top of the defense for the then quicksilver Pato, but there's also an exceptional drive --an attribute that made him much more deadly in his younger days. He could dribble. He could push the ball beyond defenders.

The Pirlo that is on the field in my team is the world champion Pirlo, who was never physically dominant, but he compensated for that failing with his cerebral play. He was always the smartest man on the pitch. Playing passing lanes and pouncing on loose touches to recover possession; embodying the doctrine of pass and move like few others ever could and having such a vast array of talents that he could be dangerous from his team's defensive third to the opponent's box. One 60-yard pass could lead to a goal, and so could his free kicks and strikes from outside the 18.

He was control personified. Even in moments of intense pressure, he had already calculated how to escape it and the two moves beyond that. That is not to say that he didn't have his weaknesses: the failures of the body are hard to hide in a 90-minute game and his Hollywood passes are a sin to be lived with.

Fitness for the Suarez role -

As I mentioned in the post above, the primary requirement for this role in my mind is extremely accurate long passing. And Pirlo is basically peerless at this in the pool, even better than Xavi, Alonso etc. The secondary requirements are directness and flair, always trying to pick a forward with a pass instead of aiming to keep possession. Again Pirlo trumps everyone in this department. Like Luisto Suarez he started his career as an attacking midfielder and like him Pirlo always retained the flair and directness that comes with playing this role. Yeah he is slightly less mobile than Suarez, but he ticks much more important boxes for me. I would not swap him for any player in the pool for this role.



On his peak in his Milan days he was everything you would want a deep-ish playmaker playing for a direct counter attacking side to be - Great passer, direct, great dribbler with plenty of flair, not afraid to shoot from distance and a decent tackler.

Dribbling:
Pirlo was an absolutely world class dribbler, and is definitely not inferior to Suarez by any means. I wanted to do some gifs but there are way too many to chose from. Just check this video out, there are turns and flicks and feints to make any AMC proud -



Surging forward:
Ok yeah, Suarez is probably a bit more aggressive and attack minded, which stems from the fact that he was a 1 in 2 scoring attacking midfielder at Barcelona and even after he changed his position to sit deeper he was still a fair bit attacking. Pirlo also had a similar start as an attacking midfielder playing behind the front men, but he really developed into a great hub in the middle of the field and still retained his attacking verve more than say Xavi or Alonso. For example this beauty of a goal -

htpn2p.gif


Or this sweet assist from the edge of the box -

uyFgW7.gif


And again there are way to many instances of him surging forward to gif, I would really recommend this video -


Goal scoring threat :
Suarez (for Inter) - 42 goals in 256 appearances.
Pirlo (for Milan) - 32 goals in 284 appearances.

Again Suarez is better but I don't believe this is a significant margin. In any case goal scoring threat would probably be the last reason for selection of deep lying playmaker in a team which has Ronaldo, Suarez, Di Maria and Silva up front.

Quick interplay:
Once again I can gif the hell out of Pirlo's beautiful interplay with his team mates, but if you've seen the videos I posted above I am sure you would agree that he was pretty quick in the interplay. Not Xavi quick again, but we need to remember that its a quick counter-attacking, deep-sitting, pressure-soaking team he is playing for. If you watch any Grande Inter big matches where catenaccio was in full flow, you will find that Suarez's long passing is much better and much more used than his short passing.

Role on pitch:
Both are playing the same role, that is of being the primary deep lying playmaker in the team.

Having said all this, I would like to re-iterate that in the tactic we are playing, having long range passing from the deep is probably the most important trait we are looking for. Our team would be pushed back on many instances and in those times we would need an accurate passing outlet to relieve the pressure. Also Pirlo is playing in front of 3 center back + a left back + a tough defensive mid + hard working right winger. If thats not the setting for him to shine, what would ?

Bonus:
We need to compensate for Corso's set piece ability as well. While David silva plays the role well enough in open play, He is no match to God's left foot when it comes to free kicks, Pirlo however is one of the finest set piece taker of our generation and so fulfill that role as well.

Also I don't think it needs to be stressed enough that Suarez is one of the best player of his generation and probably the best Spanish player of all time along with Xavi. When I say Pirlo is similar to Luisto, I mean as similar as you can get within draft pool and in the most relevant characteristics to the tactics.

Ok if you are not convinced so far, I don't think next bit is going to make any difference. But still -

Jm9jRK2.png


As you can see, both of them possess brilliant long passing (at least in PES folks opinion), Suarez is faster and more aggressive, while Pirlo has a better short passing game and is better at free kicks. Both are impeccable technically.

Pirlo was hardly a static playmaker sitting in front of defense. He uses his dribbling a lot and was much more fowrad thinking, always trying to attack, here's an interesting snippet from 2012/13 (sadly Squawka does not have stats before that) -
Sxg2lzf.png


Here you can see the difference in much more static (defensively better) playmaker Carrick and Pirlo, esp in Successful Take ons (Which I understand is number of time you dribbled past),which is about 5 times more than Carrick and twice as much as Xavi. He is much closer to Iniesta than say Carrick or even Xavi and this is peak (UEFA Europe's best player) Iniesta. Earlier Pirlo was even more progressive.
 
Just bumping it in case anyone will have questions for me or Tuppet. Absolutely no interest in this game :(
 
Why Boateng is perfect for the Blind role (n3 and n4 were the real playmakers in Van Gaal's team, like he himself said)

Boateng's heatmap from the Slovakia game
fetch


Long passing
fetch


Actual defending (a moment of the Euros for me so far)
fetch


Bonus: Germany would've won it in 1966 if they had Boateng
fetch
 
@harms
Did you consider using Badstuber as your left centerback for the De Boer role? From the start I thought he's perfect for it, a truely similar player with the same experience at leftback (good but not great because of the lack of pace), the same brilliant ability in the left foot, similar passing range and style of play. I don't mind Abidal and obviously he's a perfect fit to play a left sided centerback in a back three, but that's where his similarities to De Boer end in my opinion. Badstuber would play the role much, much close to how Frank de Boer played it and I'm pretty sure that van Gaal if given the choice between Abidal and Badstuber would choose the latter for it.
 
@harms
Did you consider using Badstuber as your left centerback for the De Boer role? From the start I thought he's perfect for it, a truely similar player with the same experience at leftback (good but not great because of the lack of pace), the same brilliant ability in the left foot, similar passing range and style of play. I don't mind Abidal and obviously he's a perfect fit to play a left sided centerback in a back three, but that's where his similarities to De Boer end in my opinion. Badstuber would play the role much, much close to how Frank de Boer played it and I'm pretty sure that van Gaal if given the choice between Abidal and Badstuber would choose the latter for it.
No, haven't thought about it at all, but it's a great idea. I had Abidal as my n.2 choice in that position, with an obvious upgrade, but Badstuber should be great here and he may be even better fit stylistically (in terms of similarities to de Boer) than my ideal pick. Too bad that subs aren't allowed
 
Tbf I would also prefer someone more wing-ish in Corso's role. They positions with Silva are similar, roles - not so much. Silva is a n10 who starts out wide, Corso played more direct football and spent more time in wide areas iirc, plus he was seriously faster, which is pretty important in counter-attacking set up
 
I guess we can already say that I'm going to lose it because everyone seem to ignore this thread :lol:
 
Not much in this, but kluivert and seedorf being in there still leans me towards tuppet because hes had to put proper thought into all 11 players whereas those two are so blatantly obvious that you cant really score them.
Tbh, it's not harms fault that original team players are available. I don't think that should be a factor in voting.
 
I like Tuppet's introduction of Alexis Sanchez there for Jair. Similar power, dynamism and goal threat brought to the table.
 
Robben/Ribery type? Neymar?
Robben's mirrored version would've been brilliant, but he with his left foot is a pretty bad fit.
Neymar if a wing forward who he never played as a winger in a strict system (even if Overmars had more freedom than George on the right)
Ribery? Maybe, have thought about him too

What makes Nani awful in that role in your opinion?
 
@Tuppet went to bed 5 hours ago so he won't be here for a while too. I will send my penos to the usual suspects, do them when you'll get Tuppet's