Sheep draft QF - NM vs Cutch

Who would win based on player peak?

  • Total voters
    32
  • Poll closed .
(BOZSIK CONTINUED)

In Bozsik’s absence the Hungarians prevailed and Cucu was able to return for the semi-final against defending champions, Uruguay. Arguably the finest game in the history of the sport saw two supreme attacking sides take it in turns to threaten the opposing goal. Hungary seemed certain winners at 2-0, but Uruguay fought back to force extra-time. Kocsis restored the Hungarian advantage before applying the killer blow with a header from Bozsik’s cross. The final against West Germany saw Puskas return from injury, but Hungary again allowed a two goal lead to slip away. This time it would be West Germany who would prevail.

The defeat was a tremendous anticlimax for a team that seemed sure to win. Hungary had not lost a match for four years since their defeat to Austria in Vienna, recording 27 victories and four draws in the intervening years. To lose the match that mattered most was a crushing disappointment. Yet almost immediately the team started winning again. It was not until 1956 that they would lose another game.

That was the year of the Hungarian revolution which prompted the break up of the “Golden Team”. When the uprising took place Honved were abroad as they prepared to take on Athletic Bilbao in the European Cup. The team had been scheduled to depart on a tour of South America, and although the tour went ahead it did so without the permission of the Hungarian authorities. When it finished the players were faced with a difficult decision: should they return to Hungary or remain in exile?

Bozsik’s position was among the most difficult. He was not only a member of the Communist party, he was also a deputy in the Hungarian parliament. Furthermore, his father had recently died and he did not feel he could abandon his mother and four brothers in Budapest. The chance to coach at Atletico Madrid (an offer obtained for him by Emil Osterreicher) was tempting, but he could not fail to return home.

As he did so both Honved and the Hungarian national team fell apart. Czibor, Kocsis and Puskas, all decided to stay in the West and in their absence the club was no longer competitive. Despite that, Bozsik remained. A disappointing World Cup in 1958 did not deter him from captaining the Hungarian national team and in 1961 he became only the third man in history (after Billy Wright and Thorbjorn Svenssen) to reach 100 caps.

Given his lack of goalscoring prowess and the limited availability of footage it is perhaps inevitable that the name of Bozsik has largely been forgotten. Yet there are few historical players who would have been more valued in the modern game. For Bozsik possessed the gift that is the most valued in contemporary football and the hardest to find, that of time. He had the ability and composure to wait for the right option and to execute what few others could even see. In an era where such qualities are at a premium, Bozsik would have been peerless.
 
NILTON SANTOS - 'THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA'


i



PROFILE
With a debonair bearing that oozed style and confidence, and handsome looks topped off by a fashionable pencil moustache, Nilton Santos might have been an idol of the silver screen. In fact he was left-back in one of the most revered football teams of all time, the Brazil side which lifted the World Cup in 1958 and retained it four years later, an elegant performer both solid and scintillating. Poignantly, two of his closest comrades in the Selecao rearguard, right-back Djalma Santos (no relation) and goalkeeper Gilmar, died earlier this year.

Nilton Santos, nominated by his incomparable compatriot Pele as one of the 125 greatest living footballers in 2004 and named in the world team of the 20th century by journalists in 1998, complemented his muscular, more down-to-earth full-back partner perfectly. Endowed with magnificent all-round technique, he was a composed and complete performer who could have excelled in any area of the pitch. Tall and powerful but never a thunderous tackler in the manner of his namesake, he was expert in nicking the ball away from opponents with crisp, beautifully timed challenges and intelligent interceptions, born of his acute positional sense. As a result, he tended to remain injury-free, unusual for a defender of his vintage.

Santos was also a pioneer of the exhilarating overlap in an era when most full-backs ventured forward only rarely. Never were his attacking instincts illustrated more vividly than at Uddevalla in Sweden in the Brazilians’ opening game of the 1958 World Cup, which ended in a 3-0 win over Austria. After winning the ball deep in his own territory, he carried it to the halfway line, where he passed to Jose Altafini. Then, instead of retreating to his defensive slot as was expected of full-backs at the time, he continued surging forward, accepted a return pass and scored with a powerful shot.

As Santos dribbled, his coach Vicente Feola had been close to apoplexy, fearful of the gap being left at the back, and he was heard to shout: “Crazy, crazy... Oh, well done!” That spectacular manoeuvre fired the imagination of full-backs the world over, and the game became all the more entertaining as a result.

Santos made his initial impact with the Rio de Janeiro club Botafogo, joining from junior football as a 23-year-old attacker in 1948. At first he wasn’t thrilled by the suggestion that he should switch to the back line, but he did so and put his inimitable stamp on his fresh role. He became a loyal one-club man, helping to garner serial silverware, including the state championships of 1948, 1957, 1961 and 1962.

But it was in the international arena that he made his most indelible mark after collecting the first of his 75 caps in a 5-0 drubbing of Colombia in spring 1949. Soon he became a regular in the yellow No 3 shirt, delighting the fans with his cultured methods, though it was for untypical pugilism that he hit the headlines during the 1954 World Cup finals in Switzerland. Brazil’s quarter-final clash with the marvellous Hungarians was expected to be a classic, but instead it descended into an undignified scrap, entering folklore as the Battle of Berne. Santos and the Magyars’ captain Josef Bozsik, who also happened to be a member of his national parliament, were sent off for fighting as the South Americans lost 4-2.

The left-back had another day to forget when he captained Brazil in their 4-2 defeat by England at Wembley in May 1956, getting the runaround from the wing wonder Stanley Matthews, but it was a different story two years later in Sweden, when he didn’t miss a game on his majestic Pele-inspired team’s way to the world crown. His display against the Swedish star winger Kurt Hamrin in the final was hailed as a masterpiece as Brazil won 5-2, the occasion garnished further for Santos by the brilliance of his protégé, the right-winger Garrincha.

Several years earlier Santos had been nutmegged on the training pitch by an awkward rookie, whom he urged Botafogo to snap up. They did so, the maverick Garrincha hit the heights and the two became close, with the younger man invariably moderating his notoriously wild behaviour when around Santos out of respect for his mentor. That was just one of many insightful interventions in the affairs of club and country by Santos, who was known as “The Encyclopedia” for his comprehensive knowledge of the game.

Come the 1962 finals in Chile, by then deployed in a more central defensive position, he was ever-present again as Brazil retained the Jules Rimet Trophy, beating Czechoslovakia 3-1 in the Santiago final. That was the international swansong of the 37-year-old, who played on for Botafogo until 1964 then took up coaching. His contribution to the game was aptly summed up by Zito, one of his most eminent team-mates, who said: “When you played the ball as much as he did, the position didn’t really matter ... Nilton Santos wasn’t a defender or a full-back. He was just a star, it was as simple as that.”
 
Just a few posts there about 3 of my Greatest Of All Time players that strangely enough could easily be underrated by the younger voters. Nilton Santos was a legend of the game, a pioneer of his position which resulted in the style of players like Roberto Carlos his opposite number here in later generations. Nilton Santos was the complete footballer.
Jozsef Bozsik was the heartbeat of one of the all time great International football teams and is the standout centre midfielder on this pitch. He is considered the greatest deep lying playmaker of all time.
Finally Sir Bobby Charlton, another legend of the game and no doubt the finest player ever produced from Great Britain. England and Man Utds record goalscorer, a phenomenal statistic for a player who predominantly was an attacking midfielder.
 
THE FORGOTTEN STORY OF JUST FONTAINE

France-s-Just-Fontaine-in-007.jpg


In 1958, an inexperienced French striker set a record for the most goals in a World Cup – and he wasn't even wearing his own boots


Records are made to be broken, especially that deliciously snappable Milli Vanilli vinyl, but with some you might as well save your energy. There is surely no storm perfect enough for Just Fontaine's record of 13 goals in a World Cup, set with France in 1958, to be beaten. In only one of the last nine tournaments has a player scored even half as many, when Ronaldo managed eight in 2002.

Fontaine was a born finisher, smooth and strikingly two-footed. There are similarities with the greatest goalscorer of them all, Gerd Müller: both were squat men with formidable strength, particularly in their tree-trunk thighs, and both had a supernatural awareness and serenity in their patch of land, the 18-yard box.

Like a few of France's greatest players, Fontaine wasn't born in France. He was born of a Spanish mother in Marrakech, then part of French Morocco, and started his club career with USM Casablanca. Fontaine later moved to Nice and then Reims, as a replacement for the Madrid-bound genius Raymond Kopa. It was with Kopa, one of the great No10s, that he would have such an impact in Sweden in 1958. Fontaine went into the tournament at his peak: he was 24 years old, relatively fresh because of an unplanned winter break for a knee operation, and had just hit 34 goals in 26 league games to help Reims to the double.

Yet his part in the tournament was not set in stone. Fontaine had played only five times in as many years for France before the tournament; after scoring a hat-trick on his international debut, in a World Cup qualifier, he was not picked again for three years. (This is nowhere near as daft as it sounds: Fontaine was one of 11 debutants in a dead rubber 8-0 win against Luxembourg, who were such weak opponents that he would probably have needed to score all eight to catch the eye.)

He continued to put goals on the board for Reims, and was eventually recalled, although when France arrived in Sweden for the World Cup, he had only scored one international goal in 53 months. The France national selector Paul Nicolas privately told both Fontaine and René Bliard that they would be the man to play ahead of Kopa and the excellent Roger Piantoni. Fate sorted out a potentially tricky situation: Bliard went home after he was injured in a warm-up match.

Fontaine feasted on a steady stream of gorgeous passes from Kopa – man had not discovered the sweeper in those days – and their partnership, though short-lived at international level, was legendary. Fontaine scored in all six matches, starting with a hat-trick in an unexpected 7-3 demolition of a decent Paraguay side who led 3-2 at one stage. Two more followed in a 3-2 defeat to Yugoslavia before he scored one and made one (for Kopa, a rare example of the fluffer being fluffed) in the 2-1 win over Scotland that put France into the quarter-finals.

There they met a tired Northern Ireland, who were dismissed 4-0. Fontaine scored two, the second a supreme goalscorer's goal. France's performance was so majestic that the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet said: "You have to go back a very long way in history to find any trace of a team that has played as elegantly in Sweden as the French."

In the semi-finals they met the favourites Brazil, who had Pelé, Garrincha, Nílton Santos, Didi, Vavá, Mario Zagallo and the rest. Vavá scored in the second minute, but seven minutes later Fontaine equalised classily after a beautiful buildup. "One has never seen a finer goal," wrote the man from the Guardian. It remained 1-1 until the 36th minute, when Vavá broke the leg of the France captain, Robert Jonquet. There were no substitutes in those days, so Jonquet spent the rest of the game wincing on the wing, and Brazil trounced the 10 men 5-2.

It meant that, to beat Sandor Kocsis's record of 11 goals in a World Cup, set with Hungary in 1954, Fontaine needed to score three in the third-place play-off against West Germany. He hit four in a 6-3 win. The game was competitive only in name – "Fontaine only had to stay on his feet to score goals," wrote Cris Freddi ishis definitive history of the World Cup – but even then, Fontaine had scored nine in the first five games, in a tournament where no other player hit more than six. "These were easy pickings," adds Freddi, "but his credentials as a goalscorer stand up to any scrutiny."

His overall total could have been more than 13. He hit the bar twice against Scotland and let Kopa take a penalty against West Germany, even though at that stage he only had 10 goals for the tournament.

Fontaine's scoring feats are even more improbable in view of the fact that he was not even wearing his own boots: he had to borrow a pair from a team-mate (not, as some of you familiar with tales of magic boots might suspect, Jimmy "Dead Shot" Keen, but Stéphane Bruey).

Nor did he receive a Golden Boot at the end of the tournament: in those days there was no formal presentation, and he had to make do with an air rifle from a local newspaper. Forty years later he received a golden boot from Gary Lineker as part of a television programme tracing the history of the award.

Fontaine broke his leg twice in 1960 and, as a consequence, played his last international at the age of 27, finishing with the computer-game record of 30 goals in 21 appearances. His strike rate of 1.43 goals per game is the highest of anybody with 30 international goals. In 10 competitive internationals he scored 21 times.

He went on to manage France, Luchon, Paris Saint-Germain, Toulouse and Morocco, with mixed success. He also inspired an indie band who "don't really do happy!". Now, at the age of 78, he lives in Toulouse, owns two Lacoste shops and predicts results for the French pools. "I spend my days playing belote [a French card game]," he says. "Other than that I watch the African Nations Cup, the Premier League, the Bundesliga, Serie A, La Liga ..."

Fontaine has regularly dismissed the idea that goals were a cheaper currency in his day. "No, it wasn't easier to score in 1958," he said, possibly 0.00000000004 seconds after watching a video of David Luiz. "The state of the ball, the length of the trip over and the amateurism of the backroom staff made everything much more complicated than today. I had somebody else's boots as well. And the last great World Cup scorer, Ronaldo, played against teams such as China and Costa Rica. Above all else, referees protect strikers much more than they did in my day. So let me repeat it: 13 goals is an enormous total. Beating my record? I don't think it can ever be done."
 
The Oranje and Ajax’s exhilarating defender

1655583_full-lnd.jpg


When asked to share their dreams of a career in the beautiful game, budding young footballers are likely to profess admiration for the role of prolific goalscorer, midfield maestro, or even unbeatable goalkeeper, but it would be relatively unusual to hear a child aspire to become a professional fullback.

It is said that a player becomes a left-back by circumstance more often than by choice: a winger who is asked to drop back, or a centre-back who fills in on the flank to help out his team. This is true of most countries, except in the Netherlands. Since the 1970s, the position of left-back is not one that players simply occupy by default. It has become, by contrast, a veritable vocation. The reason for this? The brilliance of Ruud Krol.

It is only fair to point out at this juncture that, as well as being the greatest left-back of his era, the Dutchman was also one of the period’s best wingers, defensive midfielders and sweepers. The ideal representative of the ground-breaking ‘total football’ concept, Krol boasted an impressive athleticism that was matched by a sharp intellect.

“Our system provided a solution to the old stamina problem,” Krol said of the style established by the legendary Rinus Michels. “How do you go about playing for 90 minutes and conserving your energy at the same time? As a left-back, if I have to run 70 metres up the wing, it’s hardly ideal if I have to immediately cover the same distance to regain my position. So if the left-sided midfielder can slot in where I was, and if the winger drops back into midfield, that cuts down on the distances. That was our approach."

It was an approach that was simple to follow on the international stage when it was also the way things were already done domestically, as was the case for Krol, who made his debut for Ajax in 1968. He would reign supreme on the left side of the Amsterdam club’s defence at Dutch, European and world level, as Eredivisie titles (1970, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1979 and 1980), European Cups (1972 and 1973) and an Intercontinental Cup (1972) were all captured in style.

From party animal to football addict
While it is true that everything is easier when playing in a ‘dream team’, the struggle to initially become part of said group is sometimes overlooked by observers. Brought in for next to nothing from the youth team of Rood Wit, a modest outfit operating in the lower divisions, Krol had to show patience in order to make the breakthrough from the reserves to the first team.

As a right-footed player, the first hurdle he faced came in the imposing shape of Wim Suurbier, Ajax’s starting right-back and at the time generally accepted to be one of the best in the world in that role. Undeterred, the Amsterdam native worked on improving his left foot for months, and in 1969, he eventually became the successor to Theo van Duivenbode, on the other side of the defence.

The second obstacle was a less than flattering reputation for enjoying the good things in life a little too much. As Michels recounted: “The greatest danger to Ruud’s career was not Feyenoord’s right winger, or PSV’s Rene van de Kerkhof, but rather the beautiful women in the bars and nightclubs of Amsterdam’s old town.”

Thankfully for Krol, during his initial pre-season with the first-team squad, he struck up a friendship with new recruit Nico Reynders, who would become a crucial influence on the then youngster’s career, persuading him to go to bed early and train harder.

The message was received and understood, so much so that Krol would become a model professional. “I’d still go to the cinema or to a nightclub from time to time, but football was what I thought about most of the time,” he recalled when asked about a generation of footballers reputed to be as committed on the pitch as they were hedonistic off it.

“Some players were more attracted by the nightlife, but I only cared about the football. Sometimes, Michels thought that I seemed too stressed. At those times, he’d come to see me and say, ‘Go on, Ruud, go out and have some fun!’ And that’s what I did, but never before an important match."

Final heartbreak in Munich and Buenos Aires
Consequently, when German newpaper Bild Zeitung splashed a titillating story across its front page the day before the Final of the 1974 FIFA World Cup Germany™, one in which some of the Dutch squad were alleged to have spent a night partying with members of the opposite sex in the hotel swimming pool, Johan Cruyff’s reaction of gathering his team-mates to announce, "We’ve got a big problem”, was somewhat understandable.

Some denied it had ever happened, while others viewed it as a conspiracy. But did it really have a destabilising effect on the Netherlands within hours of their decisive clash with West Germany? As far as Krol is concerned, it was not an issue.

He said: “It’s the same everywhere – the press do everything in their power to enable the host nation to win. We’d read the article, of course, but we were completely focused on the match."

In fact, their concentration was such that in the first minute, the Germans did not touch the ball once before Uli Hoeness brought down Cruyff for a penalty, which Johan Neeskens duly converted. Krol and Co were unable to take advantage of this incredible start, however, and would eventually find themselves on the end of a 2-1 defeat.

The winning goal was scored by Gerd Muller, who emerged victorious from his duel with Krol, who recalled: “I’d blocked his first effort, but as he went for it a second time, he mishit it a little. Otherwise I would have had it. In the end, the ball finished up in the back of the net."

Franz Beckenbauer and his team-mates may well have lifted the Trophy, but it was the Dutch who received the plaudits from the watching world, following their sensational run at FIFA’s flagship tournament, one which saw them defeat Uruguay (2-0), Argentina (4-0) and defending world champions Brazil (2-0), all the while practising a delightful, flowing brand of football.

It seemed to many who had witnessed their dominating displays that the competition runners-up would get another shot at glory in the not too distant future. And so they did, four years later in Argentina, where, even without talisman Cruyff, and with Krol now captain and deployed in a sweeper role, the Oranjecontinued to create many magic moments on the pitch, reaching a second successive Final in the process. But the fates had decided that they would once again face a host nation backed by a fervent home support.

And like Muller four years previously, the Dutch came up against a striker at the peak of his powers in the form of Mario Kempes, whose goal in extra time – his second of the afternoon – sealed a 3-1 win for LaAlbiceleste. The Netherlands had earlier come back from 1-0 down to equalise with eight minutes to go, and when Rob Rensenbrink was wonderfully set up by Krol in the final seconds of normal time, the post denied the Dutch what surely would have been a title-winning goal.

Debates about the best player to have never lifted the FIFA World Cup are always heated, with Michel Platini, Alfredo Di Stefano, Ferenc Puskas, Zico and Eusebio among the names that are regularly put forward. But when the question is extended to the best team, a consensus is usually reached quite quickly. Even the great Hungary team of 1954 are pipped to the post by the Netherlands in this category.

“It was a profoundly painful experience," said Krol over 30 years on from the second disappointment. "I haven’t really moved on from it. It’s very sad not to have been world champions with a team that played so well. I’ve got two silver medals, but I’d swap them both for a single gold one. We’ll always be the country that played well and won nothing. Of course, the 1988 side won the European Championship, but not the World Cup. The World Cup is something else altogether.”

Winding down an artist's career
Dutch football missed its opportunity to rule the world, at roughly the same time that Ajax’s reign over Europe was brought to an end by the emergence of English and German clubs, who between them would win every European Cup between 1974 and '84. In 1980, Krol turned 31 and decided that his best years were behind him. He opted to sign for Vancouver Whitecaps, but after just 14 matches for the Canadian outfit, came to the realisation that he was still capable of playing top-flight football in Europe, and promptly joined Napoli.

Once again, the versatile Dutchman’s timing was lacking – in four seasons in Naples, he won nothing, with the exception of the hearts of the Stadio San Paolo faithful and the award of Serie A’s Best Foreign Player in 1981.

He left the club in 1984, just a few days before the arrival of a certain Diego Maradona. While the Italian side were entering the greatest era of their history, Krol was drawing the curtain on his career at Cannes, in the French second division. In a town better known for its world-famous film festival, Krol summed up his career in an appropriate manner: “Football is not an art, but it is an art to play it well.”
 
What's for some reason often ignored about Just Fontaine is that he went on to dominate the European Cup after the World Cup in 1958. The article @Cutch posted doesn't even mention it. He scored 10 goals in 8 games and was Reims' best player and the top scorer of the competition ahead of Vava and Di Stefano when they reached the European Cup final, again losing against Real Madrid, in 1959. Kopa already carried the team to a final in 1956 before he left. Sadly we never saw Kopa and Fontaine at their best together for Reims. Shortly after Kopa finally returned to Reims after wasting 3 years of his peak at Real in the shadow of other superstars, a French defender broke Fontaine's leg in a league game and he never recovered from it.

Just Fontaine really is one of the forgotten gems and if you give him the benefit of the doubt because brutal tackles ended his career way too early, then his short peak is as impressive as any striker's peak. He excelled in domestic football, in European club competitions and in the World Cup and his records stand up to scrutiny. I think it was @harms , who said he rates Batistuta higher and @Edgar Allan Pillow who said Cutch should have upgraded him. I can't agree with any of that.
 
Balu said:
Just Fontaine really is one of the forgotten gems and if you give him the benefit of the doubt because brutal tackles ended his career way too early, then his short peak is as impressive as any striker's peak. He excelled in domestic football, in European club competitions and in the World Cup and his records stand up to scrutiny. I think it was @harms , who said he rates Batistuta higher and @Edgar Allan Pillow who said Cutch should have upgraded him. I can't agree with any of that.
Click to expand...
Probably a case of underrating the player who I don't know that much about and overrating the guy that I studied under the microscope for my last draft. I know about his records, of course, but I hardly remember him being recognized as one of the all-time greats. I will read Cutch's post later.

Not a shame to be considered as an inferior striker to Batistuta, Muller and Van Basten in my eyes though - yet, maybe, it's fair to put Batistuta on a level below indisputable all-time greats (+ Ronaldo, Kocsis and Romario) and argue that Fontaine belongs to the same category.
 
Goddamn, I voted to see results not thinking about the fact that I can't withdraw it. Could @Skizzo @Balu not count it for the results?
 
harms said:
Probably a case of underrating the player who I don't know that much about and overrating the guy that I studied under the microscope for my last draft. I know about his records, of course, but I hardly remember him being recognized as one of the all-time greats. I will read Cutch's post later.

Not a shame to be considered as an inferior striker to Batistuta, Muller and Van Basten in my eyes though - yet, maybe, it's fair to put Batistuta on a level below indisputable all-time greats (+ Ronaldo, Kocsis and Romario) and argue that Fontaine belongs to the same category.
Click to expand...
I personally think Batistuta is a bit overrated, but I'm a sucker for doing the job at the World Cup and in the UEFA competitions and in those he always looked like a flat track bully at best to me, never convinced the way he did in the league. Obviously he's brilliant, but he's nowhere near the GOAT strikers/forwards in my book, even during his peak.
 
Balu said:
I personally think Batistuta is a bit overrated, but I'm a sucker for doing the job at the World Cup and in the UEFA competitions and in those he always looked like a flat track bully at best to me, never convinced the way he did in the league. Obviously he's brilliant, but he's nowhere near the GOAT strikers/forwards in my book, even during his peak.
Click to expand...
Maybe. I thought so too before the managers draft, but after seeing him humiliating the likes of Baresi and literally every GOAT defender in that Serie A :drool: But yeah, there is a certain aura of nostalgia and romanticism around him (playing for middle-table Fiorentina and all that), making it hard to rate him objectively. He is not a true GOAT, that I agree, but an absolutely unplayable beast at his best.
 
Like many said before, those two are the strongest teams in the draft and they face each other too early. It sucks for the one who ends up losing here, because he obviously did a brilliant job building his side and deserved to go further.

I voted for NM/Theon in the end. It's as close a game as I ever voted in, but in the end Platini finally free to do what he did so brilliantly, maybe even better than anyone else who played the game, makes the difference for me. I was pretty sure that I wasn't going to vote when I first saw the write-ups, but I'm really confused about how Cutch wants to deal with the best player on the pitch.

Cutch said:
Not man marking no. Simeone isn't a Gattuso type that you sacrifice like that. A much more complete all round midfielder. He'll be the closest in attendance to Platini as he's got more legs than Bozsik but as I say the priority will be cutting out the supply which I presume is coming from Tardelli as Rino is merely a water carrier.
Click to expand...

I really don't get it. It brings us back to what I wrote in the last game and what makes Platini so special between all the goat AMs. He loves to drop deep, even between the centerbacks and start all the attacks himself. He doesn't need anyone to supply him, yet it still doesn't limit his goalscoring. It's what I meant when I wrote, Platini is easier to defend against when tasked to stay upfront and let Pirlo do the build-up from the back, because taking Pirlo out of the game is possible. Platini at his best? Nope, not in my book. At least sacrifice Simeone to do a man-marking job on him. That's way more important than anything else Simeone could offer for your side.

Anyway, on another day I might have voted for Cutch, because I absolutely love his team and he has so many favourites of mine in his side, but after watching all the Platini Euro '82 videos lately, I have to give him the edge here. I also really like Hamrin's role against Nilton. It either limits Nilton's attacking contribution or Hamrin, starting as a 2nd striker, drifts wide in behind the space Nilton leaves open on his runs forward to cause problems for Cutch on the counter. It's tricky to defend, trickier than what Cutch has to offer and NM's team looks better equipped to soak up the pressure.
 
'Flat track bully at best' is an incredibly harsh assessment of a player who was ripping up the best domestic league I'v ever seen on a regular basis.
 
Fergus' son said:
'Flat track bully at best' is an incredibly harsh assessment of a player who was ripping up the best domestic league I'v ever seen on a regular basis.
Click to expand...
I didn't say Batistuta was a flattrack bully in general, far from it. I just described that he failed to show that incredible league form on the biggest occasions and in my book that separates the greatest players from the rest.
 
Balu said:
I didn't say Batistuta was a flattrack bully in general, far from it. I just described that he failed to show that incredible league form on the biggest occasions and in my book that separates the greatest players from the rest.
Click to expand...


I understand but still harsh IMO, particularly the part about Uefa competitions. I know the English teams he played against were on the receiving end of some belters. Definitely one of the greatest strikers IMO.
 
Annahnomoss said:
Goddamn, I voted to see results not thinking about the fact that I can't withdraw it. Could @Skizzo @Balu not count it for the results?
Click to expand...
I think we've allowed it before, but it's @Skizzo 's call. I liked the idea of draw as a 3rd option, that you introduced in the last draft you ran.
 
Fergus' son said:
'Flat track bully at best' is an incredibly harsh assessment of a player who was ripping up the best domestic league I'v ever seen on a regular basis.
Click to expand...
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 :wenger:
 
Great player profiles Cutch, some cracking stuff in there.

Wasn't going to mention Fontaine because my intention is not to play him down, but IMO the Batistuta comparison was not too far off the mark - Both were fantastic goalscorers but a touch too reliant on service to be in an all time great category. Kopa was the star of that French side and it was Kopa winning the Ballon d'Or.

Fontaine was clearly a great player and obviously knew where the net was, but he was a proper out and out #9 (not a bad thing). If you look at his goals Fontaine's play revolves around playing on the shoulder and waiting for a through ball to slot in, often beating the defender for pace as he was very quick. He wasn't one to drop deep or dribble through defences. He was more reliant on service from other players.

I really don't want to seem like I am criticising him because he was an excellent finisher but I think he is well marshalled here by Ferdinand and Schwarzenbeck.
 
Balu said:
I voted for NM/Theon in the end. It's as close a game as I ever voted in, but in the end Platini finally free to do what he did so brilliantly, maybe even better than anyone else who played the game, makes the difference for me. I was pretty sure that I wasn't going to vote when I first saw the write-ups, but I'm really confused about how Cutch wants to deal with the best player on the pitch.



I really don't get it. It brings us back to what I wrote in the last game and what makes Platini so special between all the goat AMs. He loves to drop deep, even between the centerbacks and start all the attacks himself. He doesn't need anyone to supply him, yet it still doesn't limit his goalscoring. It's what I meant when I wrote, Platini is easier to defend against when tasked to stay upfront and let Pirlo do the build-up from the back, because taking Pirlo out of the game is possible. Platini at his best? Nope, not in my book. At least sacrifice Simeone to do a man-marking job on him. That's way more important than anything else Simeone could offer for your side.
Click to expand...

Man markin implies sacrificing a player to follow Platini around the pitch all game. Just saying that won't be the case. I've 3 all round complete midfielders that will track him depending where he goes. Simeone the most likely though as I expect Platini to operate the closest to him.
 
antohan said:
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 :wenger:
Click to expand...

Can't disagree with that.
 
Joga Bonito said:
Bozsik, whilst not being the most mobile or tenacious, had good positioning, reading and tackling. Pretty solid defensively. Charlton too had the work rate to aid the midfield off the ball.
Click to expand...

Sorry I forgot to reply to this.

Bozsik and Charlton can add something off the ball but that isn't their focus as players and they wouldn't do much to stop Platini getting into the game - Puskas as well when he drops deep. That wouldn't really be Charlton's remit and you wouldn't want him focusing on that anyway when he's probably the best source of a goal.

I think Tardelli, Gattuso and Scirea would all offer more defensively in the midfield than anyone in Cutch's team, bar possibly Simeone. Cutch's team is great so it's hard to find a weak point, but IMO there isn't a real answer to Platini and Puskas - And they are the two best players on the pitch.

On the flipside NM has tried to give an answer to how he would stop Cutch's best player in Charlton. Whether you think it'll work or not, freeing up Scirea to keep an eye on Charlton is going to make things difficult. Scirea is the best defensive player on the pitch, he won't stop Charlton (sometimes he won't even be in his zone) but I think Platini and Puskas will get an easier ride here.
 
Voted for Cutch because I want to see this go to a draw. I also prefer his team shape more, bar Simeone as his sole defensive mid.. I'd have preferred a 4-2-1-3 but that is being pedantic.

The way I see it is his team has a clear system, I can imagine it being played out in my head.. amazing wingers, stunning.. it doesn't get much better than Gento and Matthews. I love the recent fightback in relation to Fontaine, he deserves to be championed.. performed at the highest level and his record elsewhere demonstrates he is no Klose but a true footballing heavyweight. He shouldn't need to be replaced unless Van Basten is available.. definitely not a weak point but a strength for Cutch.

Defensively, it is close to perfection.. apart from Krol & Nesta, not sure it is the most complementary of partnerships, reminds me of my Vasovic and Carvalho combination but there is no doubt for this particular match up, they're perfect. Both quick and super responsive and there is no real bruiser they're up against, it is Puskas so they have the right skill set to keep tabs on him at least.

Platini is a monster, but Boz and Bobby are monsters too in their own right and I think Bobby needs to be championed here.. he is a footballing god in his own right and not the type of player who'd go missing in a game of this magnitude. He also has the better support cast in my opinion.
 
scirea.png


GAETANO SCIREA

Among many stereotypes in world football the one regarding Italy and top class defenders is one of the most appropriate ones. Starting with the likes of Pietro Rava till recent names like Giorgio Chiellini, Italy has always had a knack of producing great defenders. Among these names few have weathered the test of time and have gone down as the greatest ever in history books. Gaetano Scirea was one such name – arguably the finest defender to have ever come out of the peninsula.

A sweeper who read the game impeccably, possessed the touch of a trequartista and sauntered effortlessly into midfield to launch attacks. He relied on positioning and anticipation and would act as a silent assassin. Unlike his tough and often harshly derided partner Claudio Gentile, Scirea was one of cleanest tacklers in the game.

And Scirea was not just a great defender – as he would often go on overlaps and his excellent passing range meant he was the starting point of many of his team’s attacks. There are scores of pitch perfect defensive performances in his career but one of his finest attacking displays came during the Turin derby in March 1982. With Juventus trailing 2-0 against Torino after just 20 minutes, Scirea came out of his defence to score two times as the Bianconeri eventually triumphed 4-2. Such was his consistency that he kept out the great Franco Baresi out of the Italy starting XI as long as he was part of the squad.

Scirea’s performance for Italy was as sparkling as his Juventus career. His greatest triumph came in 1982 when a sturdy Italian defence held strong in the face of some of the greatest attackers in the world to clinch their first post-World War 2 title. Gli Azzuri started terribly in group stages but exploded to life in the knock out rounds as they waltzed past Argentina, Brazil and Poland to meet West Germany in final. Italy dished out a flawless performance in one of the most one sided finals in the history of World Cup, winning 3-1, with Scirea assisting Marco Tardelli’s goal.

Two decades have passed since Gaetano Scirea’s death but he still remains one of the most respected Juventus legends. His clean, almost pristine presence on and off the pitch has led to numerous tournaments and awards being named after him. Yet, in some ways he still remains under-rated thanks to his quiet, unassuming demeanor. When talking about the 1982 World Cup triumph, general football fans invariably talk about Paolo Rossi’s exploits. In defence, Claudio Gentile’s ferocious man-marking on Zico and Maradona usually gets mentioned but Scirea, someone who performed consistently in every match is often forgotten. Thankfully, fans of Juventus and Italian football in general have and will always continue to hold him in highest respect.

“He was one of the greatest players in history,” recalled Dino Zoff, “The most graceful player I have ever seen. He had the skill of a playmaker. He could do everything. There will never be another of his kind.”
 
I don't think you can discount Annah's vote here. Some scan voter can come in and vote with regards to make it a draw, in which case Annah's vote whilst being invalid would have actually decided the game.
 
antohan said:
Make up your mind. Does it count or not?
Click to expand...
I think it should, because it definitely influenced other voters. Some might have voted differently if NM wasn't in the lead. If @Annahnomoss wasn't sure about the vote, he should have abstained until he finally made up his mind.

It's why I'm not the biggest fan of allowing to change your vote in general. I don't mind it early into the game, but it sucks in the last 4-5 hours.
 
Loving the way @NM and @Theon ignore questions from a notorious 80s Juve fan.

FWIW I disagree with @Edgar Allan Pillow re: a forward being a more important acquisition than Scirea.

Also agree with @Balu that three CBs looks a bit much here. Carlos Alberto should stay back and tucked in, Hamrin provides width there anyway and Cutch has the stronger combo. Conversely, Bobby Carlos is wasted if not as an attacking fullback but to make NMs threat a match on that flank he needs Zé as well.

Schwarzenbeck excelled at covering for an attacking fb and libero either side of him. He is the perfect fit. Scirea plays and is a great outlet. Ferdinand, brilliant as he is, is surplus to requirements.

Midfield would then be able to accommodate Gattuso as a destroyer and Zé doing a Di María. The thought of Platini starting a move from deep with Tardelli and Zé either side of him is truly frightening and would no doubt break the camel's back in an otherwise tight contest.
 
antohan said:
Loving the way @NM and @Theon ignore questions from a notorious 80s Juve fan.
Click to expand...

What do you want me say man, you directed your question to NM anyway. I've posted quite a lot in this thread and IMO we've defended the team more than the opposition.

Gattuso was playing so that he can put pressure on Bozsik. You know that I rate Gattuso very highly as I've spoken with you about him before, for my money there isn't a better ball winner out there. That's all he gives you, but he was fantastic at that. So to answer your question the reason he's playing was to put pressure on Bozsik and allow Tardelli to play more box to box.
 
Theon said:
What do you want me say man, you directed your question to NM anyway. I've posted quite a lot in this thread and IMO we've defended the team more than the opposition.

Gattuso was playing so that he can put pressure on Bozsik. You know that I rate Gattuso very highly as I've spoken with you about him before, for my money there isn't a better ball winner out there. That's all he gives you, but he was fantastic at that. So to answer your question the reason he's playing was to put pressure on Bozsik and allow Tardelli to play more box to box.
Click to expand...
Why not play both him and Zé and drop Ferdinand? Carlos Alberto can do the tucked in RB job here and free up a much more dangerous attacking threat, from midfield no less, allowing you to unquestionably prevail there and in your control of the game.
 
Voted NM. Think he had room for improvement but being more cautious with Rio at the back wouldn't cost him the game, just impairs his ability to win convincingly.

Sorry @Cutch :(
 
antohan said:
Why not play both him and Zé and drop Ferdinand? Carlos Alberto can do the tucked in RB job here and free up a much more dangerous attacking threat, from midfield no less, allowing you to unquestionably prevail there and in your control of the game.
Click to expand...

We did speak about playing two centre backs, but the idea was to free up Scirea to push into midfield and keep an eye on Charlton as much as possible. The biggest threat we believed was Charlton on the edge if the area - hitting a long shot or breaking forward from 30 yards out as he used to do.

That was the logic of it at least, to try and limit Charltons influence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.