Or you could try to post your views in a slightly less dominant way
. Highly doubt that will ever happen though and for some reason everyone takes you so fecking seriously all the time.Sheep Draft Q/F - Sajeev vs VivaJanuzaj
- Thread starter Skizzo
- Start date
. Highly doubt that will ever happen though and for some reason everyone takes you so fecking seriously all the time.@antohan @VivaJanuzaj @Edgar Allan Pillow @crappycraperson
How many voters even read all the arguements though? I'd be genuinely clueless. Most just see the OP. Let's avoid all the ugliness
I think all or most who have managed draft teams do. Scan voters don't.
This.
That is so accurate it is not even funny. Reason I just can't be bothered with these drafts. We should really adopt a max post rule for anybody except the managers in the match up.
I think some of you exaggerate greatly how much anyone is able to actually influence these matches. There have been many voters this time round, most of whom don't post in the threads - and they probably don't give a feck what we rage and rave on about.
I highly doubt that anto or anyone else is capable of turning the tide against someone who would otherwise be winning - it's not the way it works. People who take an interest in these things aren't stupid. They know bloody well when someone is selling a piece of crap, claiming it's a nugget. And the so-called scan voters clearly don't read these threads anyway - so nobody's going to sway them with rhetoric and salesman tactics.
I don't consider anto a "dominating" presence in these drafts. He's usually very active and he obviously has strong opinions on this and that - but that is a good thing, in my book. What do people want? Some sort of polite, academic discussion with no raised voices?
If anto had flooded the threads with biased nonsense, then yes, by all means - it would have been a problem. It's not the reality of the thing, though, is it? He's one of the most knowledgeable contributors to these drafts - aggressive at times, no doubt, and clearly not a born diplomat, but what the hell: These things would be far duller - and less informative too - if he weren't around.
I highly doubt that anto or anyone else is capable of turning the tide against someone who would otherwise be winning - it's not the way it works. People who take an interest in these things aren't stupid. They know bloody well when someone is selling a piece of crap, claiming it's a nugget. And the so-called scan voters clearly don't read these threads anyway - so nobody's going to sway them with rhetoric and salesman tactics.
I don't consider anto a "dominating" presence in these drafts. He's usually very active and he obviously has strong opinions on this and that - but that is a good thing, in my book. What do people want? Some sort of polite, academic discussion with no raised voices?
If anto had flooded the threads with biased nonsense, then yes, by all means - it would have been a problem. It's not the reality of the thing, though, is it? He's one of the most knowledgeable contributors to these drafts - aggressive at times, no doubt, and clearly not a born diplomat, but what the hell: These things would be far duller - and less informative too - if he weren't around.
Huh? No. Reading anto's, balu's, joga's and chester's posts are the main reason why these drafts are so enjoyable. Those guys have a well of knowledge and it would be shame if they stop contributing due to some pettiness.
Agreed. I don't see any sense in maxing non manager's posts @Annahnomoss
There is no reason why they can't do so in 10-15 posts or so. A lot of these draft matches turn into what a poster want a certain team to line up as or play as rather than commenting on presented formation and tactics (I am guilty of this myself). The discussion about what could have been different could come after the match as well.
As nm last match showed, even if the discussion comes after the game its not really appreciated. I really dont see what effect having a posting limit would have than driving players away from posting/contributing in the draft games.
The managers can change the personnel and/or the formation during the match. Surely discussing whether this should actually be done has to be relevant and legitimate. I've benefited directly from the latter myself - making changes after criticism, winning votes in the process. If the manager doesn't agree with the suggestions, he'll say so and move on.
Limiting the amount of posts by non-managers in the match threads seems both impracticable and...well, it just seems like a complete overreaction to me. And a reaction to what, one might ask.
The matches are, as it stands, the least attractive/interesting/fun part of the drafts. Imposing rules to essentially dull it all down further and make anyone without a vested interest lose ANY interest in the matches can't possibly be the way to go.
Just my opinion. I know for a fact that I wouldn't posting in any match thread where there was some sort of max limit to what you could say. Some discussions are interesting, others tedious, others again overly aggressive - all part of the game. Introducing limitations of this sort is not a good idea.
If a non-manager is making a perfect nuisance of himself in a thread, then it's up to the draft master to tell him to calm down or feck off. It really ain't that complicated.
Limiting the amount of posts by non-managers in the match threads seems both impracticable and...well, it just seems like a complete overreaction to me. And a reaction to what, one might ask.
The matches are, as it stands, the least attractive/interesting/fun part of the drafts. Imposing rules to essentially dull it all down further and make anyone without a vested interest lose ANY interest in the matches can't possibly be the way to go.
Just my opinion. I know for a fact that I wouldn't posting in any match thread where there was some sort of max limit to what you could say. Some discussions are interesting, others tedious, others again overly aggressive - all part of the game. Introducing limitations of this sort is not a good idea.
If a non-manager is making a perfect nuisance of himself in a thread, then it's up to the draft master to tell him to calm down or feck off. It really ain't that complicated.
Yup. 10-15 posts is a bunch and I doubt anybody would ever top out except on a few occasions in their draft history. You would make one good concise post rather than spread it out and that would be the only difference. But there certainly has been cases of people quoting nearly every single post that is made to answer it again by which time it is way overboard.
Don't think any one person should be highlighted, but it does happen that is a fact and when it does happen it isn't insightful and inspired posts as much as a one sided agenda.
Well getting away from draft politics and onto the game itself...
Rui Costa was a brilliant passer, Totti too, Veron as well - in fact that's a better passing three than your trio.
Van Basten has said that Vierchowod is his toughest opponent. Both Henry and Van Basten will find it tough against him, Ferrara less so but he was no mug either.
Dare to dream!
I couldn't possibly confirm this. Not until the free beer runs out at least.As regards the match, personally I like Dunga in Viva's midfield although I'd prefer him to be positioned alongside Keane with Scholes further forward. That's a minor point though. Keane produced some of his best performances alongside stylistically similar, non-flashy all around central midfielders like Nicky Butt for Utd and Mark Kinsella for Ireland. Dunga is obviously a huge step up from Kinsella especially, but the dynamic should be similarly effective. I don't think a pure holding midfielder is needed.
One other point about the debate so far is that Viva is underrating McGrath a bit imo. He was a colossal defender. Nevertheless, Viva's generally argued his case very welland wins my vote in a really close game.
Xavi said a lot of nice things about Scholes, didn't stop him raping us in two CL finals.
Anyhow, I have agreed they are good defenders. Fittingly, the best of them on the best striker, it's just once Dunga is out of the equation (which he will be, regularly) that 3v3 is heavily to Sajeev's advantage and Rivaldo v Ciro the path of least resistance.
You all know I rate Ferrara, particularly as RCB but he does have a mission critical role here and it's Rivaldo. Rivaldo shat on far better defenders 1v1, with ease.
This was one of the matches of the round, and it was very tight. However, Viva's gone through, barely.
Great game @sajeev and @VivaJanuzaj. I had lots of fun dreaming about this match.
Great game @sajeev and @VivaJanuzaj. I had lots of fun dreaming about this match.
I keep comparing Scholes with Deco of Barca, who made it work in a similar situation. I certainly don't see Scholes as a perfect fit in that role.
Glad to go through and the less nice part is behind us.
Anyone that knows Manager Anto knows by hook or crook I would have put up a real fight, even if it meant giving up on the fishing.
Fact is, I had zero interest on winning or losing, just that @sajeev could have a proper draft induction and the players got a fair hearing. I think we did put them forward the way they were and haven't let them down.
Overall, it has been clear sajeev really doesn't have the time and keeps facing timezone and access issues, so it was always going to be better for the draft that @VivaJanuzaj went through. That even when I have absolutely no idea why he wasted Breitner at leftback instead of midfield.
I still stand by everything I said, if these teams faced each other in reality and not make-believe Fantasyland out of ten Sajeev's record would read W5 D3 L2.
As for the draft Gestapo cnuts, you can all feck off, bunch of girls.
Fact is, I had zero interest on winning or losing, just that @sajeev could have a proper draft induction and the players got a fair hearing. I think we did put them forward the way they were and haven't let them down.
Overall, it has been clear sajeev really doesn't have the time and keeps facing timezone and access issues, so it was always going to be better for the draft that @VivaJanuzaj went through. That even when I have absolutely no idea why he wasted Breitner at leftback instead of midfield.
I still stand by everything I said, if these teams faced each other in reality and not make-believe Fantasyland out of ten Sajeev's record would read W5 D3 L2.
As for the draft Gestapo cnuts, you can all feck off, bunch of girls.
This.
Cracking game, well played @VivaJanuzaj @sajeev @antohan. This match has been my favorite of this round so far.
Exactly. We are all capable of making our own informed decisions without being brainwashed or anything.
I'll admit I did find antohan a bit too blunt for my liking initially and I do remember pointing it out to him in my first draft.
Since then, I have gotten used to him and realised that that's the way he was with just about everyone. Nothing personal or anything like that.
Moreover, if there is one aspect I've noticed about these draft games, it is that if there's anyone sporting an agenda or being overly critical (we've all been at some point), many jump to the other party's defense, so much so to the point of downplaying the actual extent of the flaws, which were being aggressively pointed out.
It is clearly not an effective strategy and an extremely polarising one. You are more likely to lose than gain votes, esp if you are spouting bollocks.
I also do think if a particular game thread is taking a turn for worse with regular personal pot shots, then perhaps the gamemaster should interfere as he sees fit. It just makes the entire game awkward and unenjoyable for everyone else.
So classy...
I can't really see why Breitner is a waste in leftback? He doesn't fit my theme to be playing at the middle. Is it the idea that I should've gone for someone like Carlos or Cabrini if I had no intention of playing him at CM? Or that you just think he's better in midfield?
Breitner won't play midfield for my team, I don't think a midfield of Breitner-Keane-Scholes will offer enough defensively, especially not against a team with Rivaldo in it.
There was nothing wrong with him, just that in this particular game it wasn't too different to have him or Zambrotta, while Breitner in midfield would have been far better than Dunga. Of course, not in the make-believe world where he does take care of Rivaldo.
BTW, didn't mean to take away from your win there, just making the point to all the wankers spouting shit on the basis I would do anything to win. Nonsense.
Good luck.
Take Anto out of these drafts and it becomes far less informative, he's done some brilliant write ups in his time. Certainly can be over zealous at times but take it with a pinch of salt, everyone takes him so seriously!
Last edited:
Not that I haven't done anything to warrant it. You know what I would have done to win this game if I really cared: tag all his 20 voters, talk them into penos being the fair result, win over two of them but as it goes 19-18 one can't switch... then with minutes to go I vote Viva, guy switches to makes it 19-19 but with my vote not counting Sajeev wins.
I miss the days when those dramatic endings were fun. It's not as much people taking me too seriously but the poll-winning side.
Certainly wouldn't put it past you.
To bring this discussion to the right game, I'm still confused why Viva replaced Crespo with Batistuta. Crespo is the better fit for his team, it really was an odd upgrade.I've used it for his WC record before, and you can't disagree on the biggest stages Fontaine had a greater impact. There's no denying Batistuta was immense in Serie A against some of the best defenders ever, but the sticking point for me is people keep playing him as a lone man upfront (having two attacking players is a massive draft no-no these days, guaranteed loss of a "battle" elsewhere). He always had very good foils next to him, but apparently you can take those away and he still performs at the same level
Populism, I says. Voter friendlier, 'Stuta.
No, I have no idea. Perhaps he genuinely rates 'Stuta higher. But it's a fact that the latter seems very popular round here, whereas Crespo seems - well - if not unpopular, then certainly not a vote puller either.
Batistuta was the better player, by a considerable distance.
Considerable distance is debatable. I like 'Stuta better, personally. Matter of preference, really. Never really liked Crespo, for whatever reason.
Crespo was brilliant in his pomp, though. And a very different player. So, it's not just about quality, but suitability.
Crespo was brilliant in his pomp, though. And a very different player. So, it's not just about quality, but suitability.
Certainly debateable but I do believe he is a tier below. The difference in quality is certainly substantial enough for me to opt for Batigol over Crespo, despite Crespo fitting in better (not sure I agree that he is a better fit).
I don't think the gap is that big, but yes, I rate Batistuta individually higher. But as a lone striker in a team with Nedved on the wing? I'd choose Crespo every time.
I called it an odd upgrade mostly because I thought upgrades in other positions in his team would have lifted his team higher and if he makes it to the final, I think he has to upgrade Batistuta again for one of Müller, Puskas, van Basten because that really is a significant gap.
I called it an odd upgrade mostly because I thought upgrades in other positions in his team would have lifted his team higher and if he makes it to the final, I think he has to upgrade Batistuta again for one of Müller, Puskas, van Basten because that really is a significant gap.
Ah this old chestnut, the 'tried and tested partnerships'. I like them but tend to think that you put a better player in for one of the partners, and the overall quality will eventually improve. Unless the partnership was completely dependent on specific traits of the individual players, Cole and Yorke for example. I remember Gallas being picked at RB for a team and the number of people claiming it to be a master stroke because he was going to be playing there with Terry and Carvalho next to him was astonishing.
How many seasons did Nedved and Crespo play together incidentally? Can't have been many.
Also, in what seasons did Crespo prove to be a great lone front man? I seem to remeber good quality support was required usually in the form of Claudio Lopez and Kaka. Correct me if I'm wrong.
How many seasons did Nedved and Crespo play together incidentally? Can't have been many.
Also, in what seasons did Crespo prove to be a great lone front man? I seem to remeber good quality support was required usually in the form of Claudio Lopez and Kaka. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Only one if I'm not mistaken, but it was Crespo's best overall season in my opinion, so it counts for something. I don't really agree that Lopez or Kaka played for him as foils in a way that you could say he wouldn't excel as a lone striker though. I'm not sure the same is true for Batistuta.
I guess the tried and tested works for me here, because I don't see the gap between Batitusta and Crespo as big as you do. In general of course I agree that if a significant upgrade is possible, you should go for it.
I chose to upgrade to Batistuta mostly because of the caf's low ranking of Crespo.
But to be fair, Batigol is also really underrated here. I don't think there's anything wrong with him being a lone striker, especially with a young Scholes behind him in a setup where Scholes doesn't need to do too much defending. And when Scholes isn't available, you got Nedved coming to the AM/SS role with Breitner providing width on the left.
I also toyed with the idea of playing 4-4-2 with both Crespo and Batistuta but than realized it would be suicide gung ho against that attack, might still even play it.
I agree with @Fergus' son here, I hate the lack of imagination some people show in these drafts. I talked about it with Dunga and Keane-Scholes and I'll keep on knocking it with Batigol. Just because a certain player played a certain setup in his career doesn't make it the only setup he can play it or not even necessarily the setup he'll thrive the most in.
Batigol was a beast at his prime, scoring goals in pretty much every way you can score goals. With Scholes-Nedved-Figo as your creative distribution I don't think there's a single striker in the world who won't enjoy playing that game, especially not a prime Batistuta who imo never needed that second striker next to him as long as he's got other players to open up space for him. Between younger Scholes' movement into the box, Figo's runs on the wings, Nedved's cutting inside and Figo-Nedved switching up flanks you just know he'll thrive under that amount of creativity around him. I mean who wouldn't?
But to be fair, Batigol is also really underrated here. I don't think there's anything wrong with him being a lone striker, especially with a young Scholes behind him in a setup where Scholes doesn't need to do too much defending. And when Scholes isn't available, you got Nedved coming to the AM/SS role with Breitner providing width on the left.
I also toyed with the idea of playing 4-4-2 with both Crespo and Batistuta but than realized it would be suicide gung ho against that attack, might still even play it.
I agree with @Fergus' son here, I hate the lack of imagination some people show in these drafts. I talked about it with Dunga and Keane-Scholes and I'll keep on knocking it with Batigol. Just because a certain player played a certain setup in his career doesn't make it the only setup he can play it or not even necessarily the setup he'll thrive the most in.
Batigol was a beast at his prime, scoring goals in pretty much every way you can score goals. With Scholes-Nedved-Figo as your creative distribution I don't think there's a single striker in the world who won't enjoy playing that game, especially not a prime Batistuta who imo never needed that second striker next to him as long as he's got other players to open up space for him. Between younger Scholes' movement into the box, Figo's runs on the wings, Nedved's cutting inside and Figo-Nedved switching up flanks you just know he'll thrive under that amount of creativity around him. I mean who wouldn't?
I'd disagree when it comes to lone striker. Bati was a better footballer able to build things up from deep, not what is required here.
Which seasons in particular did Crespo impress as a line front man? I can't seem to remember and need to refresh my memory!