Sheep draft SF - VivaJanuzaj vs Cutch

Who would win based on player peak?


  • Total voters
    29
  • Poll closed .
Gonna post a few links from the last game here for @iamfalcao and anyone else that mightn't have heard of some of my legendary players.

Starting with:


SIR BOBBY CHARLTON


Bobby-Charlton-large.jpg



When searching for a physical example of a true legend of the English game, you would be forgiven if you named several players before you got to the man who probably deserves the accolade more than any other – Sir Bobby Charlton.


Playing alongside Best and Law, Charlton was perhaps the most understated of the trio, but perhaps it was his humble attitude towards life and the game that saw his career and achievements dwarf those of his team-mates – for younger readers wanting to make a contemporary comparison, think of the way Paul Scholes and Ryan Giggs conduct themselves, and how, at the twilight of their careers, both have just celebrated another European Cup.

Arguably, Sir Bobby’s achievements, especially considering the trials he had to overcome in life, where even greater than our current legends.

Born into a footballing family in 1937 (brother Jack was a famous footballer and manager, while his uncles where the famous Milburns who starred for Leeds), Bobby was spotted at age 15 by United scout Joe Armstrong – and at 19, he made his debut against Charlton. In that first season he won a league title, lost in the controversial FA Cup final of 57, took part in United’s European Cup run – the first time an English club had ever entered the competition – and even scored a semi final goal at Old Trafford against a Real Madrid side featuring the magnificent Di Stefano – though the goal was ultimately not enough to help United to the final, it did secure a draw.

It was next season, however, that Bobby Charlton’s name was forever to be carved in United history. Urban legend says that Charlton and Dennis Violett changed seats with Tommy Taylor and David Pegg on a plane journey after a game against Red Star in Yugoslavia when the plane made a stop in Munich to refuel – Taylor and Pegg apparently felt they would be safer at the back of the plane. Of course, we all know what happened – the plane crashed, Taylor and Pegg were among those who sadly perished, and Bobby Charlton was one of the survivors.

Few men would have returned to work again, but incredibly, Charlton recovered to make his debut for England just TWO months after the disaster – scoring on his debut against Scotland at Hampden Park, a trademark magnificent volley that catapulted him into the public eye even more so – though even after scoring twice against Portugal in his next game, he could not have expected his international career would lead to him being his country’s all time top scorer, a record that stands today.

After Munich, success on the domestic front was scarce as Matt Busby sought to rebuild his famous “Busby Babes”, but in 1963, a remarkable 5 year spell began which saw Sir Bobby win every major prize, making a vital contribution along the way. In ’63, he starred as United won their first trophy since Munich, the FA Cup – in 1965, joined by a young Northern Irishman by the name of Best, he was a major contributor as the Reds won the league title, before a remarkable 3 year spell.

Charlton had a wonderful affection for his mentor, Busby, and refers to him as “the Old Man” – an affection clearly reciprocated, as the Scot once stated “.. Bobby Charlton never betrayed that (my trust).. it was a privilege to have him play for you”.

Although United finished without a trophy in 1966, Charlton’s form was at his peak as he scored 3 goals in England’s sole successful World Cup campaign, one a memorable rocket against Mexico, and his year was rounded off when he became only the second ever English winner of the Ballon D’or (European Player of the Year to the man on the street). He was runner up in the next two years, years which saw him first claim another league title (his third, and as it transpired, his final), and then, 10 years on from Munich, saw him score two goals as United thrashed Benfica to become the first ever English European Cup winners. That Charlton was club captain at this time was destiny, and the most fitting way to close the door on a decade that began with tragedy and went full circle.

This was the last of the trophies for Sir Bobby, but not the last of his glories – he went on to set appearance and goal scoring records for club and country until his retirement in 1973. His appearance record for England lasted for 3 years after retiring from selection after the ’70 tournament, until World Cup winning captain Bobby Moore overtook him, and his appearance record for Manchester United was only bettered in May 2008 by Ryan Giggs. Charlton remains the only player to have played in four World Cup tournaments for England.

Both of his goals records still stand – at 49 goals for England and 249 for United. While Michael Owen is closing in on the England record, it seems unlikely anyone in the next generation will get near his United record – both records are even more impressive when taking into account Charlton was never an orthodox striker.

Upon leaving United, Bobby joined Preston as player manager – a move which lasted only a year, before a season with his final professional club, Waterford United of Ireland.

Though an immensely likeable personality, Charlton did not always see eye to eye with holy trinity teammates Best or Law – Best famously refused to play in Bobby’s testimonial match after he retired – but in recent years their affinity for one another has been clear to see. Charlton was with Best shortly before he died, and in his autobiography intimated any ill-feeling that existed in the first place was purely to do with what Bobby perceived as George’s waste of talent (a feeling undoubtedly tempered by the stark contrast of that talent that was cruelly stolen from ex-teammate Duncan Edwards).

Bobby Charlton became Sir Bobby in 1994 after being awarded the CBE 20 years earlier – and today, he acts as ambassador for United. He is highly thought of by todays players and this was illustrated by them requesting that he led them up to collect the European Cup in Moscow in 2008 – a request he accepted, but then typically initially refused to accept his honorary medal, preferring instead to leave the limelight to the heroes of the hour. There can be no doubting that just as Ryan Giggs seems to personify today’s United team, Sir Bobby does just that of the Busby Babes – the triumph, tragedy and the ability to rise from that tragedy and restore the glory days to the club are equally as impressive as Giggs’ trophy haul – if not more so.

Indeed, former United team-mate summed it all up when he said of Bobby, “His story is the best in English football”.

Thanks for these! After reading the profiles in the end (not changing my vote :smirk:) was quite intrigued by some of the players. Some immense stats on some of those guys!
 
The Fontaine story is a good one i think. I genuinely had thought of him as a flash in the pan type that got lucky in one World Cup and then disappeared, like an Oleg Salenko on another level, but when you research him what a player he must have been. Unbelievable career goalscoring record.

@Balu had a good post in my last game:

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.
 
Ah, i've a different pet name for him :drool:

Anyway, Lopez is a must in that side imo, so for me Batistuta or Crespo would miss out. Great finisher in central areas and gave such good width on the left aswell. Gave the attack a different dynamic.

Agreed, particularly effective alongside Crespo (again, the importance of the "reference in the box"). Did what Henry was doing for MvB in Viva's last game ;)

You are actually right, while I think Bati-Crespo should have been tested, with the 3-4-1-2 Argentina largely played you needed Piojo there.
 
The Fontaine story is a good one i think. I genuinely had thought of him as a flash in the pan type that got lucky in one World Cup and then disappeared, like an Oleg Salenko on another level, but when you research him what a player he must have been. Unbelievable career goalscoring record.

:lol: or Thomas Skhuravy for that matter.

@Joga Bonito probably has more stories (well hidden until either he or Cutch goes out) seeing as we gave him Batteaux as a sheep. Really disappointed we haven't heard anything about him :(
 
Agreed, particularly effective alongside Crespo (again, the importance of the "reference in the box"). Did what Henry was doing for MvB in Viva's last game ;)

You are actually right, while I think Bati-Crespo should have been tested, with the 3-4-1-2 Argentina largely played you needed Piojo there.

Would have been a big call to drop Bati but perhaps Argentina would have been no worse off! As we discussed before his World Cup goalscoring record isn't that impressive on closer scrutiny
 
:lol: or Thomas Skhuravy for that matter.

@Joga Bonito probably has more stories (well hidden until either he or Cutch goes out) seeing as we gave him Batteaux as a sheep. Really disappointed we haven't heard anything about him :(

Ah Skuhravy, that reminds me of xmas past when a young cousin was playing a World Cup legends card game where they had to guess the identity of the player. Didn't have a fecking clue who Skuhravy was and it was doing my head in :lol:
 
Agreed, particularly effective alongside Crespo (again, the importance of the "reference in the box"). Did what Henry was doing for MvB in Viva's last game ;)

You are actually right, while I think Bati-Crespo should have been tested, with the 3-4-1-2 Argentina largely played you needed Piojo there.
The main issue for me was that Bati was past his best and Crespo was in his prime. He was unable to stretch and unsettle packed defences that were happy to sit deep and lacked some of the fluidity that a triumvirate of Crespo, Lopez and Aimar would likely have offered. A useful plan B no doubt and his header against Nigeria was classic Bati, stretching every sinew to get on the end of a corner that everyone else thought was floating harmlessly out of play.
 
I'm really surprised to be so far behind, I think anto pretty much summed my best mismatches for this match in his post:

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.

I'm really loving Cutch's side and I get why you think he's side is better because he's all round players are fantastic. But I'm still confident the 4-4-2 will work against it. I have plenty of routes to goal, I can make changes throughout the game to change pace like moving Nedved/Breitner to midfield and bulk the middle. I think my side will definitely work better as a unit and will be very cohesive.
 
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.

Vierchowod was in his early 30s before I even got to watch Serie A so I'm far from an expert but before I'd ever encountered these drafts he never really jumped out as a top tier all-time great to me, whether that's fair or not. I kind of viewed him in the Ferrara/Montero bracket of being brilliant without ever standing out like a Baresi as being near-superhuman. Even in retrospect, I'm unconvinced that he was better than, say, Vidic, who I've got a gigantic chip on my shoulder about in fairness. Clearly he's the better draft pick as he doesn't have the obvious weakness and few really scrutinised him every week, but I have my doubts as o whether he really had a peak greater than Vidic circa 2007-2010.

I'm not sure on whether they'd make a fabulous partnership or whether they'd ultimately be attempting to hit the same areas. They're both no9s but very different players in how they interpreted the centre-forward role. Pat Mustard is right that it was Bielsa's tactical approach rather than necessarily a lack of compatability as to why they did not feature together for Argentina circa 1998-2002.

Pretty much - and that's enough to constitute reasonable doubt for me.

Plus, I'm 95% sure they wouldn't form a fabulous partnership - a working one, that is possible, but not a fabulous one.

My ale-soaked comrade hits on the phrase that decides most of these close games for me. Its not that I outright think that partnership couldn't work, but at this point there's more question marks over Viva's account of the game than Cutch's. Shall delay voting for awhile though as they're both such great teams and Cutch's hasn't really been scrutinised that much yet.
 
Would have been a big call to drop Bati but perhaps Argentina would have been no worse off! As we discussed before his World Cup goalscoring record isn't that impressive on closer scrutiny

Bielsa is probably the only person in Argentina who thinks it should have been Batistuta starting ahead of Crespo. Some are even of the opinion it should have been Crespo starting in 1998 (and I don't see much wrong with that seeing as the rest of the attack had come through in the same batch as Crespo at River).
 
Last edited:
One more thing, I don't think a tactical change here gives me any chance really, I have a few options all provides different and bigger problems:

*Move Breitner to midfield and adding Zambrotta - seriously, placing Zambrotta against Matthews is suicide, even with Baresi there to cover for him and Nedved I'd never place Zambrotta against that calibre of a winger.
*Dunga for Crespo - I'd lose all firepower, as wingers I doubt Figo / Nedved will do enough damage upfront to cover for the loss of a striker, Scholes with Desailly on his ass and one less scoring leg to pass to won't be effective, Dunga may aid the defense a little bit, but the attack will be much weaker and really unlikely to score imo.

The 4-4-2 really solves all these problems for me. I have a very well all round team with top class players in every position that compliment each other brilliantly.
To be fair, I think Vierchowod-Baresi is the best combination in the match in terms of complimentary, and I don't see Fontaine getting chances to score here. Maybe I'm being unfair, but I wouldn't have put money on Romario to score against that defense. Charlton however is a different problem. Charlton can definitely find a crack and score one here, but that's the whole idea behind the 4-4-2 - outscore the opposition.

For christ sake! This is a Manchester United forum, if you don't believe in the 4-4-2 who will?! (Dramatic music input)
 
One more thing, I don't think a tactical change here gives me any chance really, I have a few options all provides different and bigger problems:

*Move Breitner to midfield and adding Zambrotta - seriously, placing Zambrotta against Matthews is suicide, even with Baresi there to cover for him and Nedved I'd never place Zambrotta against that calibre of a winger.
*Dunga for Crespo - I'd lose all firepower, as wingers I doubt Figo / Nedved will do enough damage upfront to cover for the loss of a striker, Scholes with Desailly on his ass and one less scoring leg to pass to won't be effective, Dunga may aid the defense a little bit, but the attack will be much weaker and really unlikely to score imo.

The 4-4-2 really solves all these problems for me. I have a very well all round team with top class players in every position that compliment each other brilliantly.
To be fair, I think Vierchowod-Baresi is the best combination in the match in terms of complimentary, and I don't see Fontaine getting chances to score here. Maybe I'm being unfair, but I wouldn't have put money on Romario to score against that defense. Charlton however is a different problem. Charlton can definitely find a crack and score one here, but that's the whole idea behind the 4-4-2 - outscore the opposition.

For christ sake! This is a Manchester United forum, if you don't believe in the 4-4-2 who will?! (Dramatic music input)

:lol: Oh, the irony! :lol:
 
You are rubbing it in, aren't you?

Bastard :mad:

@sajeev we wuz robbed!
To be fair, I think I'm facing a much stronger defense atm in terms of personnel. I hardly agreed that Ruggeri is Batistuta's kryptonite, therefore I need a better attack.

EDIT: And also, your attack required a third man in midfield in Dunga, without two strikers Baresi can go for Charlton when he beats Keane, there was no Baresi nor someone to cover for him if he would've went for Rivaldo when he beats Dunga.
 
@Gio / @Chesterlestreet , thoughts on Bati doing a Kempes? Sure, he didn't have the same #10 characteristics in terms of dribbling/passing, but he isn't far off either and they share some of the more remarkable attributes in terms of starting from deep, threat around the box, scrappy determination and finding a way through by sheer willpower when tekkers weren't doing it.

Well - a poor man's Kempes, perhaps. Some sort of Kempes'ish role without the passing and the on-the-ball skills (not that Kempes was a god in that regard, but he was clearly better than 'Stuta).

So, yes - I suppose he could do a Kempes of sorts, but I don't see why you would want him to unless you were stuck with him, as it were. It's something I'd go for as an emergency measure more than a worthwhile experiment.

In a draft, I mean. In the real world he could have been used in a custom made, deeper role in order to accommodate both him and Crespo - yes, I do believe they could have tried that with some success. They wouldn't have been up against a fantasy team spear headed by Bobby Charlton, though.
 
To be fair, I think I'm facing a much stronger defense atm in terms of personnel. I hardly agreed that Ruggeri is Batistuta's kryptonite, therefore I need a better attack.

EDIT: And also, your attack required a third man in midfield in Dunga, without two strikers Baresi can go for Charlton when he beats Keane, there was no Baresi nor someone to cover for him if he would've went for Rivaldo when he beats Dunga.

Precisely the point that was hammered on over and over again. When Dunga got beat it was down to Ferrara and Viercho to stop Rivaldo and van Basten, and that's taking Henry vs. Berthold out of the equation that reduces Henry to a simple decoy/dummy runner. It was a much clearer goal threat than Batistuta vs. Ruggeri and McGrath.

Bastard, it would have all come together beautifully :(

SAJEEV-XI-SDR1-formation-tactics.png
 
Well - a poor man's Kempes, perhaps. Some sort of Kempes'ish role without the passing and the on-the-ball skills (not that Kempes was a god in that regard, but he was clearly better than 'Stuta).

So, yes - I suppose he could do a Kempes of sorts, but I don't see why you would want him to unless you were stuck with him, as it were. It's something I'd go for as an emergency measure more than a worthwhile experiment.

In a draft, I mean. In the real world he could have been used in a custom made, deeper role in order to accommodate both him and Crespo - yes, I do believe they could have tried that with some success. They wouldn't have been up against a fantasy team spear headed by Bobby Charlton, though.

Does Bobby Charlton have any bearing on whether Crespo and Batistuta can score against his team?

Agree it would be a somewhat poorer Kempes (who also looked like a persevering donkey at times), but I think he had it in him. Maybe it's just me, because I saw him come through as a number 8 before transitioning to striker at Boca, but I always felt Batistuta was more dangerous from outside the box than inside (bar the heading). A bit like Forlán actually, he got the European Golden Boot twice yet his goals were largely from range + a few 1v1s on the keeper, but hardly playing off the shoulder or poaching goals out of nowhere inside the box. Forlán would probably be a better proven fit, which says something about the question marks here, but it's a fantasy draft after all!
 
Vierchowod was in his early 30s before I even got to watch Serie A so I'm far from an expert but before I'd ever encountered these drafts he never really jumped out as a top tier all-time great to me, whether that's fair or not. I kind of viewed him in the Ferrara/Montero bracket of being brilliant without ever standing out like a Baresi as being near-superhuman. Even in retrospect, I'm unconvinced that he was better than, say, Vidic, who I've got a gigantic chip on my shoulder about in fairness. Clearly he's the better draft pick as he doesn't have the obvious weakness and few really scrutinised him every week, but I have my doubts as o whether he really had a peak greater than Vidic circa 2007-2010.

I'd have him above Ferrara/Montero myself. When a player of his quality (and he was very much your stereotypically excellent Italian CB, top class at marking, positionally sound, etc.) has that sort of speed on him, it sort of makes him a stand-out player in itself.

He was extremely durable too - even for Juve he was still a brilliant player.

Vidic was immense during those peak years, though - so I wouldn't say Vierchowod necessarily has anything on him. About even, perhaps, all things considered.
 
It's the speed really that sets him apart, particularly in a draft context where most fantasy goals result from B/W comparisons.
 
Does Bobby Charlton have any bearing on whether Crespo and Batistuta can score against his team?

He doesn't?

EDIT After having googled "bobby charlton" I now realize you're right. I've always thought he was a goal keeper, you see. Well, live and learn, as they say.

Anyway, this is indeed a fantasy draft. So, no - I don't see the point unless for some reason you end up stuck with a certain set of players. But if you do, after a round of upgrades at that, I suppose that's yer own fault.
 
@VivaJanuzaj, I know we packed the gamethread with all sorts of random discussion but, ultimately, the point is you are not getting back in this game unless you keep this bumped. Sink or swim, draft comeback 101 ;)
 
With Breitner in midfield, is like having two Keano there. Just saying. How don't you want that?
I think he explained that: lose firepower (less of an issue if you dominate the midfield) + Matthews would tear Zambrotta a new one (which seems the most relevant issue).
 
I think he explained that: lose firepower (less of an issue if you dominate the midfield) + Matthews would tear Zambrotta a new one (which seems the most relevant issue).
Is Breitner that much better than Zambrotta as LB? Either way, the positives are more than negatives with him in midfield, imho. Also, when I see Batigol plays slightly behind Crespo, it just doesn't seem right.
 
Is Breitner that much better than Zambrotta as LB? Either way, the positives are more than negatives with him in midfield, imho. Also, when I see Batigol plays slightly behind Crespo, it just doesn't seem right.
1.Yes
2. Batigol always like being a bit deep and playing from distance, he had the perfect technique for it.

Since this game is pretty much a goner with the 4-4-2, I'll make a last resort tactical change @Skizzo @Balu :
Ferrara steps in instead of Crespo:



Ferrara will allow Baresi to move to a more advanced position as the libero and have more influence on Sir Bobby's influence on the match by marking him while Ferrara-Vierchowod, the CL winning CB pairing when the latter was far beyond his prime, take care of Fontaine, Breitner & Alberto with more freedom to roam forward, but Alberto still more defensively because of Gento(and his skills which are more defensive). When in possession, Baresi moves up to somewhat DM role to start attacks from deep, playing passing game between him and Scholes-Nedved to create chances.
 
Last edited:
That's what I'd have wanted you to go with at the start.
 
Wait, you're chasing the game and your solution is to bring a centerback on for a striker and play to quote you 'the greatest defensive rightback of all time' as a right wingback? At least play Carlos Alberto right centerback and Zambrotta rightback.
 
Wait, you're chasing the game and your solution is to bring a centerback on for a striker and play to quote 'the greatest defensive rightback of all time' as a right wingback? At least play Carlos Alberto right centerback and Zambrotta rightback.
Don't see any sense in that, to be completely honest I'm kind of selling my soul to the draft devil here. I don't believe this formation is better than the 4-4-2 but it does give me more control of the game.
The reason I won't play Zambrotta is because Carlos Alberto, in draft terms, is suicide against Gento. If he steps in against Gento, with C.Alberto having to cover for him all the time, that leaves yet again - Baresi&Vierchowod against Fontaine & sir Bobby. That's the first thing I want to avoid, so C.Alberto will definitely not play as advanced role as Breitner but he'll get more freedom going forward. Yes, he was better defensively than offensively but he still has a lot to contribute going forward.

Now, as for the "chasing the game" concept. I don't see it as I'm 1:0 behind atm and trying to score back, I don't think the voters give any meaning to 'what minute is it' in the game it's more of an overall thing. That's at least how I've always looked at it.
 
Wait, you're chasing the game and your solution is to bring a centerback on for a striker and play to quote you 'the greatest defensive rightback of all time' as a right wingback? At least play Carlos Alberto right centerback and Zambrotta rightback.
And can you please change it in the OP mate?
 
Ferrara-Vierchowod "the WC winning CB pairing"? Vierchowod was a passenger in that 1982 team (as was Baresi), and when did Ferrara won the WC? Am I missing something?

And I don't get the substitution at all. You need to score, not to sulk pressure, ffs. As I stated before, I'm sure that 4-4-2 was the best tactical decision by Viva (and he was just unlucky to come up against Cutch's monstrous team), but if you are going to change something, put Breitner in midfield.
 
:lol: or Thomas Skhuravy for that matter.

@Joga Bonito probably has more stories (well hidden until either he or Cutch goes out) seeing as we gave him Batteaux as a sheep. Really disappointed we haven't heard anything about him :(

Didn't have the time to look him up unfortunately. Already had my hands full trying to sell Schuster and Suárez. Might look into him after the draft is over though.

On the match up, I really appreciate how Viva has set up the team and more importantly, the sensible rationale behind it.

Nedved and Figo had the work rate and experience as midfielders to carry out the wide midfielder role to perfection, allowing the system to function tactically. I don't think it's overly gung ho or will be found wanting in the midfield core. Esp with the industry of the aforementioned duo and the freedom that Baresi has to step into midfield, with Matthews and Gento being primarily wide players who are facing 2 solid FBs.

I just don't really like the 'Stuta-Crespo duo though. In the sense that both were No 9s whom I could see functioning better with a more nippy agile player. They have decent link up and terrific hold up play but lack that bit of technique and 'jinxy??' link up play, to truly elevate them as a partnership and not just as 2 physical direct forwards. It doesn't even have to be a diminutive technical weakling either. I could see a physical Kempes/Keegan style player being the better foil to either one of them. Perhaps I'm underrating both as footballers but I'm just not buying the Yorke-Cole comparisons.

In saying that, I still think that it's the right decision to go with those 2 up and with Dunga on the bench.

I didn't quite like the Passarella pick from Cutch as it wasn't a significant upgrade on Krol but I can see the rationale behind going for a more physical CB to complement Nesta. Krol on the bench :(:mad:.
 
Last edited:
Don't see any sense in that, to be completely honest I'm kind of selling my soul to the draft devil here. I don't believe this formation is better than the 4-4-2 but it does give me more control of the game.
It isn't, your 4-4-2 was beautiful.
 
Ferrara-Vierchowod "the WC winning CB pairing"? Vierchowod was a passenger in that 1982 team (as was Baresi), and when did Ferrara won the WC? Am I missing something?

And I don't get the substitution at all. You need to score, not to sulk pressure, ffs. As I stated before, I'm sure that 4-4-2 was the best tactical decision by Viva (and he was just unlucky to come up against Cutch's monstrous team), but if you are going to change something, put Breitner in midfield.
Supposed to be the CL winning paring. Breitner in midfield is madness imo, won't take part in that :)
 
Yep, I gave more freedom to Baresi going in the midfield battle to limit Chalrton's effect, that has to be mean something.
Well, maybe. As I said earlier, I'm sure that 4-4-2 was your best formation and you couldn't have done anything better at this stage. Cutch was too good/lucky at drafting stage, all he needed was not to feck it up - and he didn't.