Sheep draft SF - VivaJanuzaj vs Cutch

Who would win based on player peak?

  • Total voters
    29
  • Poll closed .
Balu said:
A bit harsh on Krol ;). I'm not even sure I'd consider Passarella an upgrade, Krol was absolutely fantastic as a sweeper, both were easily the best central defenders at the World Cup in '78 and I would rank them damn close to each other in an alltime list.
Click to expand...
Yeah.. both are in a similar position with an attacking LB on the side.. surprised anto is not here banging on about mis-use of Passarella here.. :angel:
 
Don't like vivas setup here. Id have gone 5 2 3 with Keane and Scholes in middle. Cutchs midfield is on another level and this will win him the game.
 
Dunno about this match. There's something slightly off about both set-ups, I think - perhaps irrationally so. So, I'm calling it a draw so far.
 
Or Viva can drop Crespo for Zambrotta at LB..

with this MF 3

------Scholes------
---Keane-Brietner-
 
I don't see what people aren't getting. The midfield isn't my battle to win, that was the brilliance in that United side and that's how it will be played here, I steal the ball - pass it to Baresi/Breitner who are sitting rather deep, or Scholes, they pass it on to the attacking pair for a quick transition. Batistuta/Crespo can win a big percentage of that long balls, bringing it down and either distributing it between the two of them or to the flank. I agree his midfield is better, I'm just trying to revolt and undermine the middle by long balls. It's kind of a small team's tactic - using your big men upfront to dismiss the advantage of the opponent's midfield superiority.
@crappycraperson adding a third men in midfield won't do me any good, as it will put our teams in a similar formation with better players for his side, this 4-4-2 plays to the advantage of any single one of my players. Not every match is decided by midfield lads. I'm finding it hard to see him scoring in a way other than a brace by Charlton.
 
VivaJanuzaj said:
I don't see what people aren't getting. The midfield isn't my battle to win, that was the brilliance in that United side and that's how it will be played here, I steal the ball - pass it to Baresi/Breitner who are sitting rather deep, or Scholes, they pass it on to the attacking pair for a quick transition. Batistuta/Crespo can win a big percentage of that long balls, bringing it down and either distributing it between the two of them or to the flank. I agree his midfield is better, I'm just trying to revolt and undermine the middle by long balls. It's kind of a small team's tactic - using your big men upfront to dismiss the advantage of the opponent's midfield superiority.
@crappycraperson adding a third men in midfield won't do me any good, as it will put our teams in a similar formation with better players for his side, this 4-4-2 plays to the advantage of any single one of my players. Not every match is decided by midfield lads. I'm finding it hard to see him scoring in a way other than a brace by Charlton.
Click to expand...

That United side may have been brilliant but there is a reason we only won CL once with it and that too with 2 injury time goals. It was simply too gung ho to take on tactically stronger teams with similar or better quality personnel. They were great to watch and remain my favorite team for that very reason but that does not translate into results necessarily.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
Don't think it is a controversial opinion tbh. Scholes of that was not WC at all. It's only in his later DLP role, he was :drool:
Click to expand...
It is controversial perhaps because majority of the caf rated Scholes better than Keane which I find bizarre personally. Even Scholes circa 06-08 is not as good as Keane at his peak.
 
Keane being overrated a bit unsurprisingly. I don't think he'd be considered a best of all time on any other club football forum.

A class player and one of my favourites but up against Bobby Charlton, arguably Britains finest ever player and the great Jozsef Boksik he and Scholes have their work cut out even without considering Desaillys considerable presence in midfield too.

The athleticism of the likes of Charlton, Zanetti and Santos going forward along with the speed and trickery of Gento and Matthews, the vision of Bozsik and the predatory instincts of Fontaine will be too hard to withstand.
 
harms said:
Cole & Yorke was one of the most complimentary striker partnership in football history - in terms of how it elevated both of them above their actual ability level. It was not about Fergie's 4-4-2, it was about their chemistry - why do you think that Batistuta and Crespo have it in them? Did they actually play together - if I remember correctly, it was Batigol or Crespo as a single forward for Argentina, never as a pair. A genuine question here, not a dig at your team - if you are keep telling us about how they are such a great fit to each other, I would love to hear some actual arguments for it.
Click to expand...

That's how I remember it too, and Bielsa as Argentina manager doesn't seem to have seriously entertained the idea of playing them together.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/world_cup_2002/1839793.stm

Of course, Bielsa has very particular views about formations and how the game should be played. I'm a fan of 4-4-2 in general, but with two No. 9s I do need some convincing that they will be complementary, and just assuming that they can replicate the Yorke/Cole telepathy doesn't do it for me.

To be honest, I think one of them is largely redundant here, and you can't afford that against a team as strong as Cutch's. I see Charlton as being the deciding factor here. In the last match I almost felt he was being underated, with Platini being accepted as the best player on the pitch without argument. Charlton is surely in a similar bracket.
 
crappycraperson said:
That United side may have been brilliant but there is a reason we only won CL once with it and that too with 2 injury time goals. It was simply too gung ho to take on tactically stronger teams with similar or better quality personnel. They were great to watch and remain my favorite team for that very reason but that does not translate into results necessarily.
Click to expand...
I get that, I really do, but that's why I bulked up the defense with such class. Baresi-Vierchowod is as perfect for each other as it comes, I don't see many strikers getting joy against them and Fontaine won't definitely, Baresi will also keep an eye if Keane loses Charlton and will help. Carlos Alberto will clash with Gento and I don't see him doing much either here against the best defensive RB of all times. The only route to goal I see from him is Charlton beating both Keane and Baresi than scoring/finding Fontaine. Will it happen? Maybe once in the game. Now, think of Batistuta getting a long ball from defense, bringing it down to Crespo who passes it back to Batistuta who shoots his usual scorchers from distance* and scores, or passes it to joining Nedved/Zanetti on an incredibly fast counter attack. I can see me hitting him at least once every match with that.
I really don't think man for man my team is better, I just think my tactics is better. If Cutch had a better striker or a better winger for Matthews, I'd raise the white flag, but gung ho can work against his team, because I simply can't see him scoring much.
 
Balu said:
A bit harsh on Krol ;). I'm not even sure I'd consider Passarella an upgrade, Krol was absolutely fantastic as a sweeper, both were easily the best central defenders at the World Cup in '78 and I would rank them damn close to each other in an alltime list.
Click to expand...

I rate Passarella higher simply because I've seen a lot more of him than Krol. Also he was aa bit of cnut, which i like! I would have probably replaced Stanley Matthews first.
 
Pat_Mustard said:
That's how I remember it too, and Bielsa as Argentina manager doesn't seem to have seriously entertained the idea of playing them together.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/world_cup_2002/1839793.stm

Of course, Bielsa has very particular views about formations and how the game should be played. I'm a fan of 4-4-2 in general, but with two No. 9s I do need some convincing that they will be complementary, and just assuming that they can replicate the Yorke/Cole telepathy doesn't do it for me.

To be honest, I think one of them is largely redundant here, and you can't afford that against a team as strong as Cutch's. I see Charlton as being the deciding factor here. In the last match I almost felt he was being underated, with Platini being accepted as the best player on the pitch without argument. Charlton is surely in a similar bracket.
Click to expand...
No I don't really assume they'll have the same communication level as Yorke-Cole, I'd never dare to, but they are simply perfect foils for each other in this tactics. Both big men with a top class aerial game who know how to both shoot from distance and find space between defenders. I don't see a scenario where in 90 minutes Figo/Nedved won't cross an early ball to one of them.
 
Batistuta didn't need much to score to be fair, it was enough that the defender would've given a step too much room and he would've fired one of these:

 
Both Batigol and Crespo have performed well in 2 man forward partnerships so that should not be an issue here.
 
Batistuta have so many goals in his career against Maldini for example, can't see how anyone would question his abilities to score here.
 
VivaJanuzaj said:
Batistuta have so many goals in his career against Maldini for example, can't see how anyone would question his abilities to score here.
Click to expand...

You can't say Fontaine and Charlton won't score while at the same time say Batistuta and Crespo will. They have all scored goals against top defenders at the highest level.
 
Theon said:
Depends what you mean by the term GOAT but I certainly think he's one of the best midfielders ever and I don't think its possible to play the role much better than Keane did. I can't think of any better that I've seen other than Matthaus who was a bit different anyway.

Aye, I think we had a better team than Cutch and would have won that game 7 times out of 10.
Click to expand...

I actually agree with @whoever spoke about Scholes here. Keane is being asked to do too much. Scholes in the 90s was never amongst the world's best.
 
VivaJanuzaj said:
No I don't really assume they'll have the same communication level as Yorke-Cole, I'd never dare to, but they are simply perfect foils for each other in this tactics. Both big men with a top class aerial game who know how to both shoot from distance and find space between defenders. I don't see a scenario where in 90 minutes Figo/Nedved won't cross an early ball to one of them.
Click to expand...

Bear in mind if its in the air that Daniel Passarella is one of the best headers of a ball you could imagine. If it's on the ground there's a fair chance he and Nesta, 2 of the best readers of a game you could imagine, will have anticipated it.
 
VivaJanuzaj said:
I don't see what people aren't getting. The midfield isn't my battle to win, that was the brilliance in that United side and that's how it will be played here, I steal the ball - pass it to Baresi/Breitner who are sitting rather deep, or Scholes, they pass it on to the attacking pair for a quick transition. Batistuta/Crespo can win a big percentage of that long balls, bringing it down and either distributing it between the two of them or to the flank. I agree his midfield is better, I'm just trying to revolt and undermine the middle by long balls. It's kind of a small team's tactic - using your big men upfront to dismiss the advantage of the opponent's midfield superiority.
@crappycraperson adding a third men in midfield won't do me any good, as it will put our teams in a similar formation with better players for his side, this 4-4-2 plays to the advantage of any single one of my players. Not every match is decided by midfield lads. I'm finding it hard to see him scoring in a way other than a brace by Charlton.
Click to expand...

To be fair, we DID dominate the game with our midfield 4 in a lot of those games. It wasn't just quick transitions.

Also what @crappycraperson said.

I really want to change my vote to you here Viva. Convince me to do it.
 
Pat_Mustard said:
To be honest, I think one of them is largely redundant here, and you can't afford that against a team as strong as Cutch's. I see Charlton as being the deciding factor here. In the last match I almost felt he was being underated, with Platini being accepted as the best player on the pitch without argument. Charlton is surely in a similar bracket.
Click to expand...



Agree completely.

Not sure what Crespo is doing here, as his opponent has suggested, he really isn't all time draft semi final material.
 
VivaJanuzaj said:
I get that, I really do, but that's why I bulked up the defense with such class. Baresi-Vierchowod is as perfect for each other as it comes, I don't see many strikers getting joy against them and Fontaine won't definitely, Baresi will also keep an eye if Keane loses Charlton and will help. Carlos Alberto will clash with Gento and I don't see him doing much either here against the best defensive RB of all times. The only route to goal I see from him is Charlton beating both Keane and Baresi than scoring/finding Fontaine. Will it happen? Maybe once in the game. Now, think of Batistuta getting a long ball from defense, bringing it down to Crespo who passes it back to Batistuta who shoots his usual scorchers from distance* and scores, or passes it to joining Nedved/Zanetti on an incredibly fast counter attack. I can see me hitting him at least once every match with that.
I really don't think man for man my team is better, I just think my tactics is better. If Cutch had a better striker or a better winger for Matthews, I'd raise the white flag, but gung ho can work against his team, because I simply can't see him scoring much.
Click to expand...

I think you answered your own question there. The midfield battle is important because I don't think you can shackle Charlton with Bozsik and Desailly also there. Keane simply has too much to do here. Baresi can be reactive in dealing with Chalrton but not active unless you are using him to man-mark Charlton. Once you add Passarella's forward runs to all this maze then you are asking for a super human effort out of Keane/Baresi.
 
Vierchowod may very well be the best man to face Fontaine here, as both were lightening quick, but I think that Viva's gung-ho approach will make him vulnerable against Cutch's front four, especially Gento, Fontaine and Matthews, they were so fast and vertical. And Charlton's movement in behind won't always be covered by Baresi. Voted for Cutch.

Also, am I the only one that thinks that Vierchowod isn't one of the best stoppers in history? One of the best defenders of his time, surely. One of the quickest defenders ever? Yes. But overall I don't think that he belongs in GOAT bracket - he is closer to someone like Rio in my opinion. Yet, I always see Viva saying that he is and nobody counters it, maybe I'm wrong here?

Edit: Just like Fontaine. Insanely good, but not in the same group with Nesta or Kohler, for example.
 
Last edited:
Voted for viva because, to be honest, iv haven't heard of half of the other teams players. Plus Crespo and Batistuta were unreal players in their prime - combined with Keane and Scholes. Made it an easy decision.
 
iamfalcao said:
Voted for viva because, to be honest, iv haven't heard of half of the other teams players. Plus Crespo and Batistuta were unreal players in their prime - combined with Keane and Scholes. Made it an easy decision.
Click to expand...

:lol:

This vote really shouldn't count.
 
harms said:
Vierchowod may very well be the best man to face Fontaine here, as both were lightening quick, but I think that Viva's gung-ho approach will make him vulnerable against Cutch's front four, especially Gento, Fontaine and Matthews, they were so fast and vertical. And Charlton's movement in behind won't always be covered by Baresi. Voted for Cutch.

Also, am I the only one that thinks that Vierchowod isn't one of the best stoppers in history? One of the best defenders of his time, surely. One of the quickest defenders ever? Yes. But overall I don't think that he belongs in GOAT bracket - he is closer to someone like Rio in my opinion. Yet, I always see Viva saying that he is and nobody counters it, maybe I'm wrong here?

Edit: Just like Fontaine. Insanely good, but not in the same group with Nesta or Kohler, for example.
Click to expand...

Yo don't need 2 GOAT CBs for a great partnership. Vierchowod + Baresi is a great partnership even going into finals of this draft.
 
harms said:
Vierchowod may very well be the best man to face Fontaine here, as both were lightening quick, but I think that Viva's gung-ho approach will make him vulnerable against Cutch's front four, especially Gento, Fontaine and Matthews, they were so fast and vertical. And Charlton's movement in behind won't always be covered by Baresi. Voted for Cutch.

Also, am I the only one that thinks that Vierchowod isn't one of the best stoppers in history? One of the best defenders of his time, surely. One of the quickest defenders ever? Yes. But overall I don't think that he belongs in GOAT bracket - he is closer to someone like Rio in my opinion. Yet, I always see Viva saying that he is and nobody counters it, maybe I'm wrong here?

Edit: Just like Fontaine. Insanely good, but not in the same group with Nesta or Kohler, for example.
Click to expand...

Vierchowod is a bit unique in the mold of Scholes. He started off being a great stopper and later developed in to something much closer to Baresi as in a very complete ball playing defender. In both roles he was absolutely world class without a doubt and that makes it very easy to pick him as you can have him as "Rio" in one game and in the next you upgrade your CB with Baresi and suddenly Vierchowod is played as a stopper.

He's definitely not in the tier of the very best though in either role. So his use in a draft goes way beyond his actual peak for that reason and it is hard to talk against Rio Ferdinand too. How would you criticize him? Which ability do you talk badly about? He was fast, brilliant at reading the game, great tackler, great at interceptions, a real commander, great acceleration, good in the air etc etc. Just not "quite as brilliant as the best in history".

There is just no reasonable way to talk down a player like that, I think people avoid doing so yet don't count them as a match winner in comparison to the opponents here for example.
 
Last edited:
Cutch said:
FFS :lol: Read the profiles mate
Click to expand...

NM said:
:lol:

This vote really shouldn't count.
Click to expand...

Next to vote it says do it based on player peak :rolleyes: i like vivas players so they would give any team a game as far as im concerned. Hes got Keane FFS he wins the midfield on his own at his peak. He would have kicked bobby off the pitch 10 mins in probably.
 
Wowza! Crackin' side @VivaJanuzaj, wasn't expecting that switch to 4-4-2 at all.

I have no time to read up, but I can imagine the scoreline reflects people going on about our '99 vintage not winning enough, being too gung-ho, etc.

To which I reply:

- Batistuta + Crespo is a brilliant pair, better than Cole-Yorke (even including mutual understanding) and as a joint threat a much bigger headache than Fontaine, without a shadow of a doubt. It screams goals.

- Both Nedved and Figo are improvements on Beckham and Giggs, CRUCIALLY, in that they would be far more adept at controlling the game, its tempo and not letting it fall into the manic to and fro that United '99 was.

- The midfield isn't overpowered by virtue of having two men there, I very much see it as a Nedved-Keane-Scholes trio where Nedved gives Bozsik a torrid time and Keane does his best against Sir Bobby.

- Both defences look brilliant although I never got the Passarella pick. Actually, it would have been better for Cutch that Passarella faced Batistuta and Nesta was left to deal with Crespo. As it is, Nesta will be the one dragged out of the box to close down Batistuta and Passarella the one having to stick to Crespo, when both are at their best in the opposite role.

- I simply don't buy Gento and Matthews having a significant impact here. I think they have had a good run, but this is as far as it goes, leaving all the onus on Sir Bobby and Fontaine against Vierchowod and Franco feckin' Baresi. Two awesome defences, but one attack is missing Edson's blue pills.

- Knowing Cutch's love for millenium players, I would bet good money that he would be voting VivaJ here if he were a neutral.
 
Last edited:
iamfalcao said:
Next to vote it says do it based on player peak :rolleyes: i like vivas players so they would give any team a game as far as im concerned. Hes got Keane FFS he wins the midfield on his own at his peak. He would have kicked bobby off the pitch 10 mins in probably.
Click to expand...

Ignore the pisstakes, you have every right to go with what you know works. Most people voting are in the same boat as you, they just don't admit it.
 
crappycraperson said:
Yo don't need 2 GOAT CBs for a great partnership. Vierchowod + Baresi is a great partnership even going into finals of this draft.
Click to expand...
Wasn't saying that he is not final/semi-final worthy. He is worthy, no doubt about that, and I quite like him being partnered with Baresi. I was asking a different question.
 
iamfalcao said:
Next to vote it says do it based on player peak :rolleyes: i like vivas players so they would give any team a game as far as im concerned. Hes got Keane FFS he wins the midfield on his own at his peak. He would have kicked bobby off the pitch 10 mins in probably.
Click to expand...

Your just giving me more reason to think your vote shouldn't count.

Keane wins the midfield on his own :lol:

Keane would have kicked bobby of the pitch :lol:

What the likes of Charlton and company had to endure from defenders you clearly know nothing about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.