Given how little attention Schiaffino is getting as my playmaker, I should just link anto's post about Schiaffino right here: https://www.redcafe.net/threads/chain-draft-main-thread.408307/page-55#post-18083232
Sheep Draft R1 - Mazhar13 v Edgar Allan Pillow/ctp
- Thread starter Gio
- Start date
Danut Lupu is a central midfielder. I said he'll play a defensive role here. I'm not playing him as a pivot in a diamond or something. He's in a midfield alongside Monti and behind Socrates in a flank manned by Gerets. I don't see why that is a spin.
As for Genghini, I'd like to see why you consider him a better footballer than Quirarte or Craig Moore.
+ Technical playmaker, known for great through passes and his vision on the field.
+ Incredible goal scorer. 172 goals from 297 appearances for Corinthians. 22 goals from 60 appearances for Brazil. And that's from playing deeper than Zico!
+ Ability to read the game and control from midfield.
And who is supposed to cover Socrates? Castellazi! If you ever want a mismatched pair in the midfield, you'll rarely find any bigger. Remember Stielike is playing a box-to-box role and will assist in running the midfield here. My counters through Socrates>Eusebio>Sarosi will be unstoppable!
I'd like you to tell me why you consider him a sheep. Because you haven't done that. You've just stated that in your opinion he is not better than the allocated sheep in this match. Which reads like the usual sort of snake oil bollocks you're wont to spout in these drafts to gain an edge.
Genghini had a decent career in French football and was selected for each of the three great pre-98 France squads (1982, 1984 and 1986). He was not a great player, but a good one - and it should be bloody obvious why I consider him a better player than Craig Moore.
Quirarte? He's not your player, is he? You're bigging up your opponent's sheep too in order to have a go at Genghini? What's the background story here?
Last edited:
Now let's compare goal threats:
Going by Club Career/Goals from wiki:
Right Wing:
Left wing:
Striker:
Attacking Midfielder:
Going by Club Career/Goals from wiki:
Right Wing:
Stanley Matthews: 71 goals in 697 appearances (0.10 gpg)
Eusebio - 423 goals in 431 appearances (0.98 gpg)
Eusebio - 423 goals in 431 appearances (0.98 gpg)
Left wing:
Schiaffino - 138 goals in 415 appearances (0.33 gpg)
Dragan Dzagic - 144 goals in 361 appearances (0.39 gpg)
Dragan Dzagic - 144 goals in 361 appearances (0.39 gpg)
Striker:
Hasselbaink - 197 goals in 468 appearances (0.42 gpg)
Sarosi - 351 goals in 383 appearances. (0.91 gpg)
Sarosi - 351 goals in 383 appearances. (0.91 gpg)
Attacking Midfielder:
Genghini: 145 goals from 436 appearances (0.33 gpg)
Socrates: 292 goals from 642 appearances (0.45 gpg)
My team will outscore him every way.Socrates: 292 goals from 642 appearances (0.45 gpg)
He may have played as a central midfielder for Romania at times, but for much of his career, he played as more of a wide attacking midfielder, especially for his clubs. Here is a video of him playing in that role:
Genghini was a part of the 1982 France team that got 4th place in the World Cup. He made regular appearances there and was a good player for them. In France, he was always in contention of winning the Ligue 1 with both Sochaux and Monaco. He won the Coupe de France in 1985, beating a PSG team containing Fernandez, Rocheteau, and Safet Susic. He was a prolific goalscorer for an attacking midfielder, scoring 71 in 212 for Sochaux and 57 in 129 for Monaco. Quirarte never did this much for his country, and Craig Moore was, as I stated earlier, more of a 3rd-choice central defender for much of his Rangers career.
In response, what makes Lupu and Moore so good that they can help you control the match?
Simply because I couldn't find anything noteworthy he has done. I can't trace any awards, individual achievements on him. Nada.
I thought that EAP would slightly outscore as well.
Whose your 12th @mazhar13? I think your team is all about that wingplay and there's not much in EAP's team stopping you from putting crosses in. Pairing Charles up front would be great imo because Hasselbaink works better with a partner and Charles would be great in the air. A change like that would swing it for me.
Whose your 12th @mazhar13? I think your team is all about that wingplay and there's not much in EAP's team stopping you from putting crosses in. Pairing Charles up front would be great imo because Hasselbaink works better with a partner and Charles would be great in the air. A change like that would swing it for me.
If only it was that easy. Who's going to play the ball to Socrates? Lupu? Moore? de Boer? All of whom will get stuff quite quickly, I might add, with our high-pressing game. Stielike running the midfield won't affect his defensive performance in any way. He has Schiaffino and Genghini, both of whom are capable of running the game as well, so it's not Stielike is doing all of the work. He will only move forward once we have a sustained spell of possession with your team pegged back and under pressure. He wouldn't really need to go forward that often anyways seeing as his passing is quite good to play Matthews and co. into play.
Well, I might consider making the change myself now.
@Gio, I'll send you the new team soon.
EDIT: On second thought, I'll wait and see how this pans out. The change won't really do much anyways.
And my sheep is Iosif Rotariu. More trophies than Genghini, but not better or more effective in my team.
And so you - without trying to downplay him unfairly at all, completely objectively - concluded that he must be no better than a sheep. In spite of having featured for some very good sides (information which is readily available). Sounds legit.
Moore has more to claim individually than him
And I never claimed Moore and Lupu will control the match. Both play a supporting role in my strategy. I've surrounded them with better players to buffer their skills. Moore has Frank de Boer, Luis Pereira and Monti surrounding him and Lupe has Monti, Eric Gerets & Socrates to help him out. Neither has more than supporting roles in assisting better players.
One more sheep as 12th man, Rotario or someone. Same as me.
Seriously? Is there no difference between a good player and a player who featured in a good side?
You are just reinforcing my point. Playing a part in a side is no big deal...has he had individual accolades? or recognition by peers, MotM peformances etc. How much did he contribute to that side's victory. Stuff like that.
Watch Genghini (#9) in this World Cup classic and decide for yourselves on whether he is, for what the word stands for, a sheep.
Of course there is. But you have just about admitted that you don't know anything about this player. You have concluded that he is no good based on the fact that you couldn't find any achievements listed for him - correct? I presume that if you had reached the conclusion that he was sheep material based on actually watching him play, you'd have mentioned this fact?
Concluding that Lupa and Moore are sheep material doesn't require a bloody thing - because they ARE sheep as defined by the standards of this draft. See the difference?
Oh good, the goals argument, because such simple comparisons are always apt.
Eusebio played as a roaming striker for Benfica and Portugal and not as a right winger a la Matthews, so that comparison is useless. Schiaffino played at a time when Catenaccio was rife in Italy, yet he still scored a decent number of goals. Plus, he's more of a creative player anyways supplying others rather than going for goal himself. Sarosi spent his whole career at Ferencvaros at a time when 3-2-5 was the most popular formation with a lack of regard for defending. Hasselbaink faced and scored against such defenders as Adams, Keown, Stam, Desailly, Leboeuf, Helguera, Naybet, Pellegrino, Carboni, Frank de Boer, and Sanchis. He scored 35 goals in 47 appearances for an Atletico Madrid team that finished 19th. If that doesn't show how good he is, then you're deluded.
Trying not to take sides but, going back to the same WC:
http://backpagefootball.com/memory-lane-west-germany-v-france-at-world-cup-82/21132/
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2008/oct/26/world-cup-platini
Djimi Traore's a proper sheep, though. Genghini isn't! Just because you didn't see anything about him or didn't watch him doesn't mean you can brand him as a sheep.
Again, to all of you voters voting for a loss against me just because I have Quirarte in defence, look back at his performances for the 1986 World Cup and see how good he was against some great attacking players in the tournament. He went against the likes of Ceulemans, Scifo, Rummenigge, Allofs, Littbarski, Dieter Hoeness, Berthold, and Brehme, yet he only conceded two goals throughout the whole World Cup. Such good performances cannot be ignored just because he's labelled as a sheep.
There's been a lack of recognition on Benarrivo, who was an amazing full back for Italy during the 1990's. Here's a clip showing his good performance for Parma at the 1993 Cup Winners' Cup final.
Come on, I did do my research on him before I posted that. The only article I found complimentary were that Aldo found, but then everybody talks about Platini, Giresse and Tigana and only few mentions are made of Genghini! I drew my opinions on his caliber. Not as random misselling as you claim!
@mazhar13 I withdraw my comments on Genghini/sheep. No offence.
I appreciate that, but it's too late at this moment. Oh well, maybe next time.
Alright, fair fecks.
I reacted to this because I found it unfair that you labeled him a de facto sheep - and that is what you did. It's uncalled for. Say that he doesn't impress you, or that he won't be able to influence matters to the required degree - say anything, really, but don't say that he's in reality just as much a sheep as your own: That's sheep, I mean cheap, tactics. Disrespectful to your opponent, IMO.
A sheep is a sheep - that's the default stance. They should be taken as a liability unless proven otherwise. Your opponent has tried to sell his CB as something other than a sheep - people may or may not buy it, but it's fair game. Would have been fair game for you to sell Lupu as a decent player too - but you haven't really done that. Same with Moore. Instead of selling your sheep, you present one of his regularly drafted players as one - see the thing here? That's what I reacted to - and that's what I called shameless spin.
You're too old a hand at this game not to know what I'm talking about.
Agree that a sheep is a sheep. that's why I did not try to sell Lupu or Moore apart from that they are well cushioned by rest of team to not be an outright liability. My core point was difference in strategy, he was playing a pressing game with a sheep CB and I was playing a compact tucked in LCB and that's what I count to make a difference.
In all honesty, Monti+Lupu+Socrates > Castazalla>Stielike>Genghini imo.
Well, Castelazzi is a bit of a non-descript type (almost literally), and very hard to assess beyond looking at superficial data. The role he's given looks right for him, though. You've got Lupu in the deepest role - and I still don't see that as an obvious choice. Like I said, I barely remember the man - but your opponent claims he was more of an offensive midfielder than a defensive one, and the only thing you've said yourself is that he's a CENTRAL midfielder (which doesn't explain why he seemingly operates as more of a shield/an anchor than Monti.
That said, Monti and Socrates are the best of the bunch, and you've got both of them.
Assessing the trios properly, though, would require some more scrutiny on both Castelazzi and Lupu.
Aye, Skizzo and I researched him for this draft but picked Nelinho instead. He looked excellent to me. Effectively, he lost his place in one of the greatest midfields ever because Luis Fernandez was better suited to the defensive role and he wasn't quite good enough to push Platini, Tigana or Giresse out of the side. Absolutely no shame there.
I'm also very unconvinced about Frank de Boer playing as a tucked in left back vs Matthews. Edgar clearly thought de Boer would face Schiaffino and hasn't adjusted accordingly, and it seems crazy to afford Matthews that much space. You have to close him down.
That said, I take equal issue with this:
and this:
from Mazhar. All in all, a great match thread with some excellent arguments and some good old-school wildly speculative stuff too. Still not sure how I'll vote, but would read again
.I doubt that you know more about Netto than me tbf and I obviously watched that final (couple of times, actually). He still wasn't an LB at his pick - you won't put Duncan Edwards at LB for example. I would even say that his secondary position was left forward and left back was only his 3rd preferred choice
Last edited:
You should also mention that he spent half of his career playing as a defender and midfielder, which makes his goalscoring stats absolutely ridiculous. He is Charles on steroids (and with additional position of a central midfielder)
Yeah. In fact he's one of only a very small handful of players who have scored two free-kicks in a World Cup. For that round he was a clear option once the superstars were blocked.
Great game @mazhar13. Action packed.
That's the only good thing about this game to be honest. It was one of the most action-packed games that I was in, but I learned my lesson now: a sheep, no matter how good or bad he is, is always a sheep and has to be treated as one, else you'll be punished like I was.
I don't think I helped myself either in making Netto a left back, but I had no other choice when I lost the chance to get a left back due to the penalties round. Plus, I thought more people would appreciate Hasselbaink. He was an amazing player for club and country in his professional career, and I think his troubling youth years really set him back in terms of playing for one of the top teams of that time (Kluivert and Ruud didn't go through the troubles Hasselbaink did; speaking of which, Ravel Morrison should really go to QPR and be mentored by Hasselbaink).
Finally, I'm disappointed that people think of Charles as a striker first and foremost. He really was equally good as a central defender as he was as a striker, but I guess more people would remember his partnership with Sivori than the times he would be a defender once Juventus took the lead or the time he was mainly a central defender for Leeds. At least I've learned lots of lessons now that could help me out some more in future drafts.
Yup. Only with experience you can navigate these games. Both of us ended up with very similar teams. Two great wide players, sheep at CB and a stop gap LB, Monti/Stielike providing steel in midfield. We messed up the LB pick too and had to play Frank as a hybrid LCB here. I still can't believe the similarities.
I once had Jari Litmanen in a previous draft. I was so over in getting him, but he fell totally flat and I had a R1 exit. And I never picked him again, though I will give it a 2nd shot sometime down the line.
And from what I know these drafts is quite severe with weak defences. You can get away with a mediocre striker or a midfielder, but a weak defender will get you in a disadvantage more than anything else.
For real? Litmanen falling flat? And I thought Hasselbaink being underwhelming was bad enough.
These drafts can be brutal and unpredictable at times...
I rate Litmanen highly
There wasn't much in it for me. A change of a single player and the vote would have swung. I rate Hasselbaink but he needed a partner. Guðjohnsen, Kiko, Alan Smith. All striker partners of his that made him tick better.For real? Litmanen falling flat? And I thought Hasselbaink being underwhelming was bad enough.
These drafts can be brutal and unpredictable at times...
I once had 3/4th of Mourinho's first Chelsea defense and I lost because my defense was shit and Gallas wasn't a right back apparently.
Just curious why? I thought Sarosi was far better than Hasselbaink and Socrates was unmatched in this game. Surely that should make a difference?
I don't really like your setup at the back. You've put De Boer as tucked in CB to help out another weak CB which frankly I don't think you need to have done. Yes Moore is a sheep but you shouldn't sacrifice a cohesive back 4. Your back 6 and goalkeeper as a whole didn't look very impressive. Had mahrez had a Genghini-quality CB and put Charles up front he'd have a classic 4-4-2 with excellent wingers and especially a dangerous right side and two strikers that complement each other well imo. Maybe a big if considering the circumstances that he got his players because his team certainly didn't go exactly like planned just like the rest of us. It's just hard to vote against a team with great people all up and down the wing and top notch goalscorers up front against a defense like yours that pretty much gave up the Matthews-Benarrivo side defensively.