Sheep Draft S/F: Indnyc vs Enigma/TRV

Who will win this match based on all the players at their peaks?


  • Total voters
    16
  • Poll closed .
If Begomi is required to provide width in attack and also protect the gaps left by Beckenbauer you are in trouble IMO. The inside left channel will have lot of opportunities for us to exploit.

I won't really question Kalle's position and he's a versatile forward that can play all across the line.

Have I used him as a RWF- certainly. Is that his best position - probably not but I can see him doing a fine job there.

In this game however he's your secondary goalscoring threat. With Bergomi playing a more reserved role - both having to cover for Beckenbauer and also not really the most attacking of full backs you would need him much closer to goal, otherwise our defence has easier task compared to having to deal with Zidane, Best, Greaves and Puskas.

Don’t think he is required as a tactic but more so he has the ability to do so.. Far more than say Gentile in your lineup

Desailly, Cole, Kohler and Bergomi are individually capable of handling your 4 attackers and does give Beckenbauer a platform to run the game
 
IMO my left flank is brilliantly suited to attack the right side.. Gentile from what I know liked to tuck in and can see Czibor causing him troubles especially with Cole in support..

Given his partnership with Koscis, I think there is a good route to goal for us.
 
Don’t think he is required as a tactic but more so he has the ability to do so.. Far more than say Gentile in your lineup

Desailly, Cole, Kohler and Bergomi are individually capable of handling your 4 attackers and does give Beckenbauer a platform to run the game
Cole isn't capable IMO at handling Best on his own. He will provide big advantage for us if isolated against him.

Neeskens, Puskas, Greaves, Zidane, Best - all are ones that historically decided big games and are clutch at scoring on big occasions.

Puskas and Best are the best attacking players on the pitch and if there are gaps for them it's really something we can easily exploit.
 
IMO my left flank is brilliantly suited to attack the right side.. Gentile from what I know liked to tuck in and can see Czibor causing him troubles especially with Cole in support..

Given his partnership with Koscis, I think there is a good route to goal for us.

Cole in support leaves Best unchallenged. Cole would be pretty quiet in this game IMO. Gentile against Czibor is IMO pretty fair match up.
 
Agreed, but then I don't really rate Kaltz as a prominent attacking fullback.
What the feck :lol: He wasn't anything special defensively, which rightly rules him out from all-time level, but offensively I'd only take Alves and Cafu ahead of him. Arguably Zanetti.

 
In 1982 it's really hard to pin down as Gentile was often given man marking duties and he was dropping in the hole in front of the defence. Bergomi was then tucking in. He had Conti in front of him. A bit of a mixture of 4-3-3 (with Gentile moving in DM and Tardelli B2B) and 5-2-3 if I can simplify it.

Thanks for that :)
 
Cole isn't capable IMO at handling Best on his own. He will provide big advantage for us if isolated against him.

Neeskens, Puskas, Greaves, Zidane, Best - all are ones that historically decided big games and are clutch at scoring on big occasions.

Puskas and Best are the best attacking players on the pitch and if there are gaps for them it's really something we can easily exploit.

Cole isn’t going to be isolated as Czibor is far more likely to drop back than either Puskas or Best.. Your full backs are going to be isolated much more than mine
 
Nilton Santos: The First Attacking Full-Back

documentário-nilton-santos.jpg


“Suddenly, a bloke comes dashing through and he’s had a shot at goal and the ball went wide, and we started looking around to see who we’d got to blame for this. We couldn’t find it. We found out it was their full-back. See, they didn’t care. I never went up there like that.”


Those were the views of a decidedly unimpressed member of the Arsenal squad after a 5-1 win over Fluminese during a tour of Brazil in 1949.


At that time, the pre-eminent tactical system of the day would have been a 2-3-5 and barring a few exceptions this was, roughly, how you could expect most teams to line up. Much in the same way that any UK game from the 70s throught to the 90s would feature some variation of 4-4-2; it was just how things were done back then. The ‘full back’ as we’d understand it today was not seen as a position that could, or even should, offer any kind of attacking threat. That simply wasn’t its function. During this era, it would even be rare for a designated ‘defensive’ midfielder to stray too far north of the halfway line.

Sea-changes in any sport come about rarely but the 1950s saw perhaps the biggest upheaval football has experienced to date with Brazil deploying their back 4 for the first time to the grand audience at the 1958 World Cup in Sweden. They employed a 4-2-4 system that was not only successful but was quickly adapted throughout the rest of the footballing world. Old systems were rendered redundant overnight. As with any new system it will fail or succeed based on the personnel to fill it and how well they understood the role. In that sense Brazil had the perfect duo to flawlessly fill the new roles.

Nilton4.jpg


Nilton Santos and Djalma Santos (no relation) were the left and right full backs respectively and it was Nilton Santos, in particular, who set the precedent for what a full back could be both defensively and as an offensive outlet. As blasé as we may be now about seeing a full back flying down the touchline, whipping in a cross and generally contributing to attacking play, back then it was completely alien. Opposition teams found this incredibly perplexing and often – like the gentleman from Arsenal – seemed almost offended by the fancy notions of these defenders running past the halfway line with not an ounce of shame.

Nilton Santos certainly didn’t let that hold him back. He even broke all conventional full-back decency when he scored against Austria in that 58 World Cup, a surging run featuring a couple of classic give-and-go’s. While Brazil’s coach at the time, Vincente Feola, has to be credited with going with the concept from the outset at such a big space, it was Nilton’s pitch-perfect execution of the role that announced the arrival of the attack-minded defender and through it changing the fabric of how the game would be played for generations to come.

Originally an attacking player, Nilton Santos was converted to a full back at Botafogo – where he spent his whole career – and was known as ‘The Encyclopedia’ due to his detailed knowledge of every aspect of the game. By the time he was basking in the glory of successive World Cup wins in 58 and Chile in 1962 he had 10 years at Botafogo under his belt. Accounts from that time underline that his influence throughout the squad was worth almost as much as his calm, silky defending.

It has been claimed that it was at Nilton’s insistence that a 17-year old Pele was brought to the 58 World Cup and he strongly recommended the signing of Garrincha to Botafogo, having been terrorised by the winger in a training game: “You have to sign this guy so I don’t have to play against him”.

Indeed, Garrincha looked up to Nilton Santos as something of an idol and he would even curb his legendary drinking binges when Nilton was around, for fear he’d think less of him. During the 1962 World Cup with Pele injured Santos, then 37 and well past his peak as a player, he goaded Garrincha into a number of top performances by telling him he’d heard the defenders from the opposing nation had been talking about how they were going to stop him. A cute piece of gamesmanship but it displayed a canny ability to man-manage even Garrincha, a feat beyond most.

As a player, Santos was said to have had it all. Unfortunately, he’s from an era where not much actual footage exists. There’s a few YouTube compilations that some brave soul has painstakingly put together and they give a sense, however fleeting, of a tall, elegant player comfortable with both feet strolling his way through games.

There’s some real highlights, including him lazily knocking the ball over the heads of advancing opposition attackers and making an absolute slipper out of a winger near the touchline. He looks easy on the ball and is always eager to advance up the park and launch an attack.


Again, none of it seem all that remarkable until you remind yourself this guy was, essentially, making this role up on the fly and perfecting it so that in the future when a coach shows a young player how to attack as a fullback he’s teaching what Nilton Santos invented.

There is a whole generation of players out there who are partially lost to history because of the lack of available footage. Nilton Santos was one of a host of great players from the mid-1950s through the 1960s that we simply don’t have enough material on. That shouldn’t detract from their achievements, especially of players like Nilton Santos who raised the bar and changed the way the game was played.

While prevailing attitude at Nilson’s time was one of derision towards the way he played, he himself was a lot more enthused about how football developed after his time;

“I have never envied today’s players the money, only the freedom they have to go forward”
 
Love that Beckenbauer axis - Kohler, Bergomi and Desailly. Custom designed, basically impossible to improve upon.

What the feck :lol: He wasn't anything special defensively, which rightly rules him out from all-time level, but offensively I'd only take Alves and Cafu ahead of him. Arguably Zanetti.


Yeah, class going forward.
 
Cole in support leaves Best unchallenged. Cole would be pretty quiet in this game IMO. Gentile against Czibor is IMO pretty fair match up.
Obviously i disagree. You can’t say Best is going to keep Cole quiet and then say Gentile is going to match Czibor

Czibor is arguably he best left winger of all time ( only Dzajic imo comes close)
 
Cole isn’t going to be isolated as Czibor is far more likely to drop back than either Puskas or Best.. Your full backs are going to be isolated much more than mine
Actually both Puskas and Czibor IMO had similar defensive roles. The Magyars were a pressing team, especially considering the time they played, but won't pin down who would provide better cover if you ask me.
 
Obviously i disagree. You can’t say Best is going to keep Cole quiet and then say Gentile is going to match Czibor

Czibor is arguably he best left winger of all time ( only Dzajic imo comes close)
Obviously I'd disagree as well. Gentile is one of the best man markers in the game. He stood tall against Zico, Platini and Maradona - one of the biggest names in history. Czibor is indeed one of the best wingers in the game, but not a patch on Best IMO(even with the United bias included).
 
Actually both Puskas and Czibor IMO had similar defensive roles. The Magyars were a pressing team, especially considering the time they played, but won't pin down who would provide better cover if you ask me.

Puskas doesn’t fall back and defend.. That was never his game.. In the system, Czibor always ran from midfield to utilize his pace.
 
I'd take Gerets, Amoros, McGrain and not counting Carlos Alberto and Andrade over him offensively or defensively.
Gerets, McGrain and Andrade?

You can make a case for Amoros and Carlos Alberto but the former I'd strongly disagree.
 
Obviously I'd disagree as well. Gentile is one of the best man markers in the game. He stood tall against Zico, Platini and Maradona - one of the biggest names in history. Czibor is indeed one of the best wingers in the game, but not a patch on Best IMO(even with the United bias included).
Yes I agree he is a great man marker.. But that’s not the role he is playing here.. At his peak he made sure the inside channels were covered.. All 3 players you listed played centrally and Czibor represents a different battle here
 
Puskas doesn’t fall back and defend.. That was never his game.. In the system, Czibor always ran from midfield to utilize his pace.
We have Neeskens on that side so we don't need Puskas to be dropping deep mate. I meant the pressing high up if we lose the ball.
 
Agreed, but then I don't really rate Kaltz as a prominent attacking fullback.

Kaltz was a good attacking full back. Its defensively that he was suspect - for example losing John Robertson and being at fault for the European Cup winning goal in 1980.
 
Yes I agree he is a great man marker.. But that’s not the role he is playing here.. At his peak he made sure the inside channels were covered.. All 3 players you listed played centrally and Czibor represents a different battle here
All 3 players also dropped to the outside channels. Czibor also liked to cut in, at Barca he played in a more of a 4-3-3 and not as an outside left in 5 man attack.
 


I know my team doesn’t have a traditional number 10 but with Netzer there I don’t think the team requires it. Phenomenal passing range and composure.

He is the main playmaker in midfield who will focus on getting the ball forward, creating chances and shooting from distance. Don’t think the opposition has a player to block his playmaking skills

Credit to @harms for the video
 
All 3 players also dropped to the outside channels. Czibor also liked to cut in, at Barca he played in a more of a 4-3-3 and not as an outside left in 5 man attack.

The Hungarian version of him didn’t cut in because Puskas was there
 
The Hungarian version of him didn’t cut in because Puskas was there
He was 23 when he moved to Honved though. I'd probably put his peak at around 27-28 where he added more to his game and became prominent member of the Barca side.
 
I have no issues with Santos being represented as a wing back but imo there are limits to what he can do in such a tight game. He is being tasked to man the entire left flank which is too much for anybody to do. Even Facchetti couldn’t do it all games especially when you have a star studded attack on that side.

On the other side, we have Best and Gentile which isn’t an ideal pairing. One won’t drop back and be a disciplined winger and the other is going to be isolated as a man marking defender. It will leave gaps in midfield for Czibor to exploit
 
He was 23 when he moved to Honved though. I'd probably put his peak at around 27-28 where he added more to his game and became prominent member of the Barca side.
I don’t know about that.. He played 3 years for Barcelona.. Wouldn’t consider that to be his peak..

It’s a moot point either way.. I don’t think his ability to stretch the pitch on the left wing can be questioned..
 
@GodShaveTheQueen

a little more on Nilton:

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...n-attacking-players-now-chelsea-antonio-conte

The left-back, Nilton Santos, was described as the first attacking full-back. Perhaps significantly, the oxymoronic nature of that term does not exist in Portuguese or Spanish, in which the word for full-back is “lateral” – side player.

That in turn accelerated the change in the role of the full-back. With no winger up tight against him, he could advance. The result, in the 1960s, was the great age of the attacking left-back: not just Nilton Santos but also the Argentinian Silvio Marzolini and the Italian Giacinto Facchetti. For England, Ray Wilson advanced as no other full-back ever had before.

Five pioneering attacking full-backs
Nilton Santos (Brazil; Botafogo): A World Cup winner in 1958 and 1962, he was the first attacking full-back to gain worldwide renown. Nicknamed “the Encyclopaedia” for his knowledge of the game.

Silvio Marzolini (Argentina; Ferro Carril Oeste, Boca Juniors): Five times a champion with Boca, he was a vital outlet in an often defensive side. A pin-up, he was the first Argentinian to sign an advertising contract, promoting espadrilles.

Giacinto Facchetti (Italy; Internazionale): Won two European Cups, four scudetti and a European Championship and scored 75 goals in 629 games from left-back, an instant riposte to those who dismissed catenaccio as a purely defensive system.

Tommy Gemmell (Scotland; Celtic, Nottingham Forest, Dundee): A right-footed left-back, Gemmell scored in two European Cup finals, grabbing the equaliser as Celtic beat Internazionale in 1967 and converting a penalty in a losing cause against Feyenoord in 1970.

Ruud Krol (Holland; Ajax, Vancouver Whitecaps, Napoli, Cannes): The great left-back in the Total Football sides of Ajax and Holland, he won six Dutch titles, two European Cups (missing the 1971 final with a broken leg) and lost in two World Cup finals.

https://footballia.net/players/nilton-reis-dos-santos

Nilton's full games from the 58 and 62 WC are up. He was more prominent in 62 where the attacking role was more appreciated.

In that side Zagallo was often tucking in helping the midfield and Nilton was providing width going forward.

Facchetti who is epitome of the zona mista was often doubted here, but again he was one of the pioneers that had to be defensively solid first and then to provide in attack - something both him and NIlton did.
 
I don’t know about that.. He played 3 years for Barcelona.. Wouldn’t consider that to be his peak..

It’s a moot point either way.. I don’t think his ability to stretch the pitch on the left wing can be questioned..
It's a bit of a moot point I agree. Touching the subject though as Puskas as well had some of his best years not as appreciated at national/club level due to the regime back then.
 
I don't get the critique of Nilton. He's great in this role imo. Its really just a 4231 with a full time defensive RB and offensive RW. Its calling this 'zona mista' that baffles me. I don't really see this as playing like a zona mista at all.
 
I have no issues with Santos being represented as a wing back but imo there are limits to what he can do in such a tight game. He is being tasked to man the entire left flank which is too much for anybody to do. Even Facchetti couldn’t do it all games especially when you have a star studded attack on that side.

On the other side, we have Best and Gentile which isn’t an ideal pairing. One won’t drop back and be a disciplined winger and the other is going to be isolated as a man marking defender. It will leave gaps in midfield for Czibor to exploit
Think Gentile is a good fit for Czibor. Bergomi as well. Ideally I'd have both of them or of course Vogts as a full back to defend against him. A more attacking full back will leave spaces and IMO Gentile is good as it gets in terms of fit. Best doesn't really need an attacking full back to stretch the defensive line so it's a bit of an ideal pairing to me. Neeskens can cover those gaps like he has done before.
 
I don't get the critique of Nilton. He's great in this role imo. Its really just a 4231 with a full time defensive RB and offensive RW. Its calling this 'zona mista' that baffles me. I don't really see this as playing like a zona mista at all.
Yeah, I've tried to clarify that. It's not a zona mista but kinda mixture of zona mista/4-2-3-1. What makes the similarity with zona mista is our defensive line - tucked in/defensively solid RB, attacking LB (in a flat four) and a libero in Scirea.

Obviously our attack doesn't represent that formation and Best/Puskas are in different roles to what a more defensive set up would be.
 
Yeah, I've tried to clarify that. It's not a zona mista but kinda mixture of zona mista/4-2-3-1. What makes the similarity with zona mista is our defensive line - tucked in/defensively solid RB, attacking LB (in a flat four) and a libero in Scirea.

Obviously our attack doesn't represent that formation and Best/Puskas are in different roles to what a more defensive set up would be.

See I don't think that's enough to even call it zona mista really just because someone has Gentile (or Burgnich for that matter) as defensive RB. I think Best changes the whole dynamic away from zona mista towards more a variation of an attacking asymmetric 4231
 
Nilton's full games from the 58 and 62 WC are up. He was more prominent in 62 where the attacking role was more appreciated.

In that side Zagallo was often tucking in helping the midfield and Nilton was providing width going forward.

Facchetti who is epitome of the zona mista was often doubted here, but again he was one of the pioneers that had to be defensively solid first and then to provide in attack - something both him and NIlton did.

Sorry but thats just not true, in 62' Zagallo was playing almost like a modern day wingback while Nilton almost never went up and looked more like a centerback in a back 3 rather then a fullback, let alone wingback!
Based on all his available games online he doesnt look like a wingback but we have to be fair and say he was old as feck in all those games so there is a possibility he was a proper wingback(like Facchetti) in his younger days.
 
Think Gentile is a good fit for Czibor. Bergomi as well. Ideally I'd have both of them or of course Vogts as a full back to defend against him. A more attacking full back will leave spaces and IMO Gentile is good as it gets in terms of fit. Best doesn't really need an attacking full back to stretch the defensive line so it's a bit of an ideal pairing to me. Neeskens can cover those gaps like he has done before.

Neeskens also needs to mind Souness though.. Don’t know how much he gets to support the gaps
 
See I don't think that's enough to even call it zona mista really just because someone has Gentile (or Burgnich for that matter) as defensive RB. I think Best changes the whole dynamic away from zona mista towards more a variation of modern 4231s

yeah it does. We moved away from zona mista as a core formation when we picked Amancio. The plan was more of a modern 4-2-3-1 with attacking full back.

Zona mista was probably a way to describe the defensive line mechanics rather than the overall game mechanics as we have done so in the thread.
 
In that side Zagallo was often tucking in helping the midfield and Nilton was providing width going forward.
Pretty sure that it's not true. Zagallo playing in midfield (and Nilton being an attacking fullback) has to be seen in context. Zagallo's revolutionary role was that he stopped playing as an outside left and began playing as a left midfielder in basically a midfield three. It's actually much closer to how most of the modern left wingers operate.

I swear, I've seen the 1962 final like 4 or 5 times (all for different reasons :lol:).

From Wilson's book on tactics:
VjKvfoE.png


 
Sorry but thats just not true, in 62' Zagallo was playing almost like a modern day wingback while Nilton almost never went up and looked more like a centerback in a back 3 rather then a fullback, let alone wingback!
Based on all his available games online he doesnt look like a wingback but we have to be fair and say he was old as feck in all those games so there is a possibility he was a proper wingback(like Facchetti) in his younger days.

I agree he wasn't analogous to a wingback but calling him more like a CB in a back 3 is going too far in the other direction for me. He was definitely much more on the wing and helping out attacks on the left side. Not like modern wing back but more supporting and providing a passing outlet on the left. Comparing him to an LCB is just not accurate either
 
I agree he wasn't analogous to a wingback but calling him more like a CB in a back 3 is going too far in the other direction for me. He was definitely much more on the wing and helping out attacks on the left side and comparing him to a LCB is just not accurate either

my comment is purely for the games i saw at 62 WC
 
Sorry but thats just not true, in 62' Zagallo was playing almost like a modern day wingback while Nilton almost never went up and looked more like a centerback in a back 3 rather then a fullback, let alone wingback!
Based on all his available games online he doesnt look like a wingback but we have to be fair and say he was old as feck in all those games so there is a possibility he was a proper wingback(like Facchetti) in his younger days.

Pretty sure that it's not true. Zagallo playing in midfield (and Nilton being an attacking fullback) has to be seen in context. Zagallo's revolutionary role was that he stopped playing as an outside left and began playing as a left midfielder in basically a midfield three. It's actually much closer to how most of the modern left wingers operate.




Unfortunately that's the only full games available online. From memmory he was providing width in the game against England - won 3-1 when they employed the wingerless formation and Zagallo was tucking in.

As Sjor mentioned of course he was 37 at the time and won't really put a modern day wingback performance.

The above quotes are for what and how the attacking full back position was revolutionized by him by accounts of journos.

I'm not selling a Marcelo like performance but if Nilton was playing in modern times, he'd be closer to an attacking full back as it gets.
 
I agree he wasn't analogous to a wingback but calling him more like a CB in a back 3 is going too far in the other direction for me. He was definitely much more on the wing and helping out attacks on the left side. Not like modern wing back but more supporting and providing a passing outlet on the left. Comparing him to an LCB is just not accurate either

Do you think he is capable of running the entire flank on his own? I don’t disagree that he was an attacking fullback (used him in the previous draft)

As a support to a winger he is perfect.. But a primary width provider imo is stretching it