Sweden 1948 VS EAP - NT peak draft

[Raees]

Yup. Not to mention how ordinary that German team looked without him.

Well his natural instinct during 88 was to push forward in the DM zone. He didn't go further than the halfway line often, but as a DM/anchor you won't need selling him IMO. I mean Rijkaard won't need much selling as a DM being his best position, it's more of an issue if he didn't have a good tournament, which is not true, so as a DM even tho in different set up to the 88 one I think he's close to his optimal form and have no issue with that.



Neither Pele

I remember getting criticized for using him as a DM in the Euro draft.. where the plan was for him to drop into CB, when Kaizer went forwards.

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/the-euro-draft-qf-team-eap-vs-raees.404001/

FFS, another EAP Xmas tree haha.

PS on Pele, I was watching the 58 performance and I still think hands down, best ever individual attacking performance I've ever seen in a final of any major tournament.

 

[Annahnomoss]

He was knocked out the moment he decided to kick Schuster out of the side, a CB would have helped immensely.

Also glad to see Voronin progressing to the semis here. He's not the flashiest name around but going by his tournament performances (as we have to for a fair bit of 50s and 60s vintages - Brazil 58/62, Masopust, Dzajic, Yashin and the likes), he was just immense. His man-marking display against Eusebio was honestly the best that I've seen, whilst his other performances were quite impressive too. I'll hold my hands up and say I've been guilty of underrating him too. I've watched him against Spain in the 1964 final (where he was Soviet's best player) and some footage here and there but not enough to form a comprehensive appraisal of him (not that a handful of full match footage is enough but yeah, goes with the territory).

Sometimes the player whom the man-marker is man-marking can be out of form, making the man-marker look better than he is. But when the player does it twice, consecutively, and against two of the most in form forwards (scratch that, players) of the tournament - Albert & Eusebio, it really means something. Esp Albert, whose performance compilations for every match is available, as too is Eusebio's (except the one against Soviet but it's understandable why it wasn't made ). Really shows the impact that Voronin has on them, and also how the man-marking is clean it is, with barely any dirty blocks or fouls, although he could get physical if needed be. Yet to see such pure and clean man-marking displays elsewhere.

Also another key aspect about it, was that it was very much single-handedly done without much support. If you watch Stiles man-marking Eusebio, he frequently had the support of Moore who was playing as a covering safety net behind if Eusebio slipped through and Eusebio was frequently double/tripled upon by opposition throughout the tournament. However, whilst Voronin could rely on the support of his teammates occasionally, it was almost as though he was exclusively handed down the responsibility of looking after Eusebio and Albert which just shows the amount of confidence they had in his ability and how good he was defensively. That's not to downplay his Soviet teammates who played really well and were a fine side overall, who deserved more recognition. I'd seriously recommend people to watch those matches in full for themselves, as there's only so much a compilation video can cover.

Couldn't agree more. Been a pleasure watching his games and I've always underrated him as well. You know the weight the name holds but he remained a player I hadn't ever got to watch myself. I'm happy I got to pick him up because he fits like a glove next to Rijkaard and I wouldn't have had a second choice for the role.

 

[Annahnomoss]

I remember getting criticized for using him as a DM in the Euro draft.. where the plan was for him to drop into CB, when Kaizer went forwards.

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/the-euro-draft-qf-team-eap-vs-raees.404001/

FFS, another EAP Xmas tree haha

"In midfield Soren Lerby and Frank Rijkaard to form a powerful yet technically and tactically brilliant platform. They will physically match up to Masopust and Schweinstreiger and ultimately it will be Rijkaard who runs the show"

I'm not trying to sell any of his on the ball qualities. I've tried to narrow down discussion to him being a stopper who acts in the same areas as he did for Holland, but in a different tactic. Rijkaard has probably never been mentioned this little in a draft before in terms of his midfield/offensive contribution.

 

[Annahnomoss]

Rubbing it in

Just wanted to defend Edgar as people thought he made a blunder when it was a gentlemans move on his part! Whether you agree with it or not I think that much is clear.

 

[Raees]

"In midfield Soren Lerby and Frank Rijkaard to form a powerful yet technically and tactically brilliant platform. They will physically match up to Masopust and Schweinstreiger and ultimately it will be Rijkaard who runs the show"

I'm not trying to sell any of his on the ball qualities. I've tried to narrow down discussion to him being a stopper who acts in the same areas as he did for Holland, but in a different tactic. Rijkaard has probably never been mentioned this little in a draft before in terms of his midfield/offensive contribution.

In all fairness, it works better in your setup as you have just 3 defenders, so there is space for him to act as more of a stopper.

 

[Annahnomoss]

In all fairness, it works better in your setup as you have just 3 defenders, so there is space for him to act as more of a stopper.

Hadn't seen your formation as it didn't load for me. Started of rough that game in regards to Rijkaard.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

More dicussions after rather than during the game

there's certainly question marks arising if players are supposed to play at peak in unfamiliar settings. Off the top of my head, none of your players ever played in a XMAS tree.

It's a given if people go for not so popular formations. The question should be suitability for that role as against requirement of having played that exact role.

You needed to upgrade Collovatti

I think one top class CB alongside Ruggeri, and this would have been yours.

I had Domigos Da Guia on bench and could have subbed him on....IF....this was discussed during the game. His 1938 WC all star team performance might have made the difference.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

At least I had my fill on 4-3-2-1. Not coming back to this anytime soon.

Not sure what to build next.

 

[Enigma_87]

I remember getting criticized for using him as a DM in the Euro draft.. where the plan was for him to drop into CB, when Kaizer went forwards.

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/the-euro-draft-qf-team-eap-vs-raees.404001/

FFS, another EAP Xmas tree haha.

PS on Pele, I was watching the 58 performance and I still think hands down, best ever individual attacking performance I've ever seen in a final of any major tournament.

I see. Well personally Rijkaard at DM shouldn't be an issue. He was more of an anchor than a traditional stopper either way. He covered the space between the defence and midfield which IMO is close to what we've used to see from him.

PS: On Pele I've prepared some quotes and highlights from 1970 games as well as Zagallo quotes, even though it's pretty beat up topic but his influence at the time was far bigger than what he was as an up and coming youngster in 1958.

Besides the chemistry between him and Muller - the two stars of that 1970 WC would be something else and play to the strengths of both of them, which to be honest was my goal since the beginning of the draft - combining those two Not that 1958 version of Pele didn't work pretty well with Vava so there's always an option, especially with Didi also on the pitch, but 1970 Pele was the catalyst of one of the best international sides of all time - pretty similar to Cruyff 1974 influence and effect on the team.

 

[Enigma_87]

At least I had my fill on 4-3-2-1. Not coming back to this anytime soon.

Not sure what to build next.

Haven't seen you build a 4-5-1 or some defensive one, maybe you can try a strikerless formation.

 

[Moby]

At least I had my fill on 4-3-2-1. Not coming back to this anytime soon.

Not sure what to build next.

3-3-1-3. Go Bielsa!

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

3-3-1-3. Go Bielsa!

That was what harms suggested we build for this draft. Gave it some deliberations, but somehow it didn't click.

What about Bielsa's 3-3-1-3?

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

It's a given if people go for not so popular formations. The question should be suitability for that role as against requirement of having played that exact role.

The "not so popular" aspect I don't think had anything to do with it.

For me the issue was Xmas formation + Dutch 74 style + Stiles, Collovati, Ruggeri. None of it was complementary in my eyes and more like a three headed monster. I am not feeling those three aspects in conjunction at all.

 

[Ecstatic]

Great game between the Pep Guadiola and Carlo Ancelotti.

As expressed in the previous game of Carlo, I would have built the team around Cruyff and tried to upgrade if possible players like Rensenbrink and Rep. However, I can understand he likes Seeler who is a great player. I'm happy to see players like Stiles and Collovati. Always refreshing to have a surprising Carlo

I've voted for Pep for his efforts, his story but above all his consistency: he chose players like Rijkaard and Voronin instead of big names in the name of his ideology. Moreover, despite appearances, he possesses some GOATs. For example, the Swedish Vieri (Nordahl) is an impressive player on the air and in terms of physical impact. The wingers, especially the great Hamrin, generally cut inside so I understand why it's necessary to have FB with a lot of freedom.

Despite appearances, the positioning of his players was relatively close to reality: Rijkaard 88 was a RCB who pushed forward.

So, I voted on the following assumptions:

1. Global strategy




2. Voronin goes forward



3. Rijkaard goes forward




Now, it's possible I have understood nothing

 

[Ecstatic]

Also, when I voted, EAP was winning 14-8 and lost 15-14

 

[Joga Bonito]

At least I had my fill on 4-3-2-1. Not coming back to this anytime soon.

Not sure what to build next.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Now, it's possible I have understood nothing

The fullbacks backs then were not adventurous as modern versions. They were mostly side-backs and more rounded than our current CBs in ability to drift wide or move about around the box, but that's it. You can't count on them for width or anything. The ball gets moved to the middle and width comes from Skolgund/Hamrin as wide forwards. So don't think the arrows on fullbacks are realistic.

 

[antohan]

More dicussions after rather than during the game

It's a given if people go for not so popular formations. The question should be suitability for that role as against requirement of having played that exact role.

Nope. As I said, Joga came up with a tactic most hadn't played in yet one where each player had a role almost identical to the peak one and their surrounding/combination players doing similar things.

You had a mish mash of players largely in unfamiliar surroundings. I voted for you because I thought it would work well enough, but can see why others would have steered clear of something experimental when Annah had a very real and tangible (proven) proposition.

I had Domigos Da Guia on bench and could have subbed him on....IF....this was discussed during the game. His 1938 WC all star team performance might have made the difference.

I did mention your CB pairing was an issue and incompatible with your fullbacks consistently providing width.

You know you didn't play Domingos 38 because there would be a gif of him playing rugby and not football. You tried to wing it with a CB pair that already looked off last time out but hadn't faced an attack like Annah's.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

I did mention your CB pairing was an issue and incompatible with your fullbacks consistently providing width.

Where is this coming from?

It was mentioned in OP that Neeskens/Masopust were capable of operating out wide. Masopust was left of a midfield trio in '62 and Neeskens was right of a midfield trio in '74. I'm surprised that their ability out wide needs to be spelt out.

I mentioned that this could well be a 4-3-3 and I just chose a 4-3-2-1 to emphasize the free roles of Cruyff and Gullit.

Also you are talking of Cafu here. When was he ever a defensive weakness leaving space behind him? He's getting the Suurbier treatment here.

And Skolgund is no Gento or Best. Cafu should be able to handle him, esp with both Neeskens/Gullit able to receive the ball out wide.

 

[Ecstatic]

The fullbacks backs then were not adventurous as modern versions. They were mostly side-backs and more rounded than our current CBs in ability to drift wide or move about around the box, but that's it. You can't count on them for width or anything. The ball gets moved to the middle and width comes from Skolgund/Hamrin as wide forwards. So don't think the arrows on fullbacks are realistic.

I've watched the offensive players of both teams but, yeah, I never watched Bergmark-Nilsson. Bergmark seems to have a great reputation

If I refer to the France/Germany 58, true that the FB weren't offensive.

 

[antohan]

Where is this coming from?

It was mentioned in OP that Neeskens/Masopust were capable of operating out wide. Masopust was left of a midfield trio in '62 and Neeskens was right of a midfield trio in '74. I'm surprised that their ability out wide needs to be spelt out.

I mentioned that this could well be a 4-3-3 and I just chose a 4-3-2-1 to emphasize the free roles of Cruyff and Gullit.

Also you are talking of Cafu here. When was he ever a defensive weakness leaving space behind him? He's getting the Suurbier treatment here.

And Skolgund is no Gento or Best. Cafu should be able to handle him, esp with both Neeskens/Gullit able to receive the ball out wide.

I repeat: I voted for you.

You are saying CBs being an issue wasn't mentioned and I'm telling you they were when the likelihood and risks of Briegel/Cafú joining the attack were discussed.

There was more discussion and clear indications of what people did/didn't like about the teams than you are acknowledging.