The Double Draft: FINALS - harms vs Invictus/Theon

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

vs
................................... TEAM HARMS ............................................................................. TEAM INVICTUS .......................................


Team harms

Summary
My team will play in a perfectly balanced 4-3-3 formation. Like all the formations in reality, it’s going to be slightly loopsided. With my superior midfield (where all my players are used in their natural role) and Messi helping out centrally most of all the wingmen on the pitch, I’m going to seize control of the game, which, I believe, will tip the odds in my favor.

Key areas

• With Redondo’s sudden departure the whole structure of Invictus’ team had taken a sudden blow. He is left with only one genuine central midfielder in Varela and he will be forced to improvise - either by introducing Zizinho to the team as a right-sided attacking midfielder (the best choice, imo), or by playing L. Andrade out of position (anto will be quoted in the game if needed). I’m assuming that he won’t play Passarella as an emergency midfielder. Di Stefano is, first and foremost, a forward - who likes to drop deep and help out midfield, but even with his all-roundness and stamina full-time midfield role will limit his attacking influence - and Zizinho, from what I gathered about him when I picked him in earlier draft, is a very all-rounded right inside forward/attacking midfielder. Overall, two players sacrificing their natural game for the team balance is too much at this stage.
• N. Santos with Cristiano Ronaldo and Cafu with Lionel Messi are, simply, as good as it gets in terms of a wing partnerships. More playmaking Nilton Santos will dovetail beautifully with the direct and physical Cristiano, while physical specimen Cafu will handle the right flank, supporting free-roaming Messi. They will face equally impressing flanks but, in my opinion, whenever Invictus fields Brehme or Andrade, their duel with Cristiano will be the most promising for the attacking player of all of the wing confrontations.

Player's instructions:

Goalkeeper

Peter Schmeichel. I hope that everyone here is familiar with him, it is a United forum after all. Peter fecking Schmeichel, his unique presence in the box, aerial dominance and cat-like reflexes will provide the last resort in case Invictus' attackers will breach my defence.


Defence

Everyone here is one of the best ever in their respective positions who proved themselves at the highest level again and again. Desailly, the rock, moves to his preferred stopper role - the role he excelled in becoming a crucial part of one of the greatest international defenses ever, winning World Cup in 1998 and Euro in 2000 and making it to team of the tournament on both occasions (on top of his 1996 inclusion). Everything else stays the same - and it can not be better - commanding leader in Figueroa, calming presence of Nilton Santos, athleticism of Cafu and sheer physicality of Desailly.


Midfield

My midfield is wonderfully balanced - two of the Europe’s greatest, Ballon D’Or winning Josef Masopust and Luis Suarez will provide the right amount of creativity, passing, ball-carrying runs and work-rate (and with them being different players they won’t interfere with each other). As an anchor I have one of the greatest water-carriers in the history of the game, 2 times World Cup winning Pele’s Santos captain, legendary Zito. It was his introduction to the team in 1958 which created the much needed balance in the squad and allowed Didi, Pele and Garrincha to play their natural game without concerning themselves about the defence - his WC winning manager Feola labelled him "a rock on which the team revolved" as his performance in 1962 warranted him a place in a team of the tournament. Zito was a colossal influence; a commanding if somewhat unsung presence in midfield, the neat, pragmatic, impeccably organised wing-half was invariably instrumental in creating the platform from which the stars dazzled. Zito was a strong, intelligent character who won tackles and made simple passes, entering the limelight only occasionally.



Attack

I hope that most here are familiar with all my attacking players, but a brief explanation is required - Messi will play as a false winger like he does in Enrique’s Barca, where he upped his playmaking game to the alien level while still remaining almost 1 in 1 goalscorer. Van Basten is the most all-rounded number 9 to ever play the game, with a unique blend of technique, strength, dribbling, positioning and hold up play and Cristiano Ronaldo will be a goalscoring wing-forward, finishing off trademark Messi’s diagonals (to Alba and Neymar in real life) or through-balls and dovetailing beautifully with van Basten, providing physical and goalscoring asset that somehow resembles Gullit’s game.

Bench
Maier, Evra, Gentile, Dzajic, Seeler, Bonhof, Boniek

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Team Invictus/Theon

​

Nothing too elaborate in the tactics for this match either - we plan on playing a balanced game and will look to keep it tight and congested in the wide attacking areas, and gaining leverage in midfield with a trio of legends - in their perfect roles, as a bridge to stimulate the attack.

1. PELÉ + GARRINCHA



An obvious point of emphasis given their exceptional historical success and personnel chemistry - and status as the two greatest players Brazil has ever produced:

Garrincha and Pelé are the most formidable attacking duo of all-time

South America - Player of the Century
1."Pelé" (Brazil) 220
4. Garrincha (Brazil) 142

The duo boasts an incredible and unmatched record as co-starters for Brazil: The national team has never lost a match with Garrincha and Pelé in the same team. There were 40 matches with 36 wins and four draws. Together, they scored 55 goals: Pelé, 44, and Garrincha, 11.

In terms of Pelé, his role here is in our view his peak one - the young, lightening quick and prolific striker who hit over a goal a game for Santos whilst beating the very best Europe and International football had to offer. He's the ideal point of attack for the team - a supreme dribbler with the technical ability to spearhead the attack with movement, intelligence, physicality and finishing ability - who hit 349 goals in 4 seasons for Santos, and 1.3 goals per game for Brazil..

As far as Garrincha goes, he is going to reprise his role as the winger who posed all sorts of troubles for opposition fullbacks, supplied the creative pipeline with an endless of amount goal-scoring opportunities (apart from scoring himself), and was elected to the World Team of the Century as he right sided attacker:

Yashin
Carlos Alberto Beckenbauer Moore Nilton
Platini di Stéfano Cruyff
Garrincha Pelé Maradona​

2. A COUPLE POINTS ON THE RESPECTIVE NATURES OF THE WIDE ATTACKS

Not going to beat around the bush here - the wider areas are destined to have a significant impact on the outcome of the game considering the quality on show. And as such, it becomes imperative to compare the two attacks, and their respective wide defensive supports, from a functional perspective (since there's nothing to separate the two in terms of quality).

First thing first, Cristiano is the weakest and most predictable creative threat out of the quartet of him, Garrincha, Messi and Best - don't think many would argue against that assertion. So that places a greater onus on Messi to be the wide creator in the final third - since Cristiano needs a constant stream of chances to score the amount of goals that he scores - and position himself appropriately. Will Messi do that? He might. Though it will blunt his own productivity to some degree, as a direct consequence. Best and Garrincha on the other hand, can create a ton of chances on their own - through which they will benefit not just themselves, but Pelé (who has proven chemistry with Garrincha) and di Stéfano as well.

Second, because Cristiano and Messi love to drift inwards, and our wide defenders know that, they need the fullbacks to overlap aggressively at every possible opportunity - which is something they have with Marcelo and Alves on a weekly basis. And that brings us to the the most natural question: how frequently can Cafu and Nilton overlap when they are up against Best and Garrincha? As a comparison, we have no problems with parking Facchetti and Brehme if we so desire, and letting Garrincha and Best do what ever they want on the flank. Facchetti was a monstrous defender despite his offensive quality, and Brehme was renowned for his positional sense, reading of the game, and the ability to instigate attacks from the deep:

Garrincha needs 0 fullback support in an offensive sense anyway, and Best was equally effective on both - the inside, and outside channel - and is the most defensively aware wide attacker on the pitch, to boot.

Third, the respective natures of the defenses to contain the wide threat (minor pedantry): Facchetti and Nilton were primarily right footed defenders. When Messi cuts inwards, Facchetti is better positioned to sweep him than Nilton is to Garrincha (a right footed attacker). An obvious attacking maneuver will be the Henry/Villa/Neymar pass to Cristiano. And we can't imagine a better defensive core to cut such moves in the bud than Nesta and Baresi, men with quick reflexes and perception of the game - who often stepped up and eliminated lateral or diagonal passing moves at their peak with surgical precision.

3. DI STÉFANO'S ALL-ENCOMPASSING INFLUENCE (THIS TIME WITH A NEW MATE)

In our opinion, we have a conclusive advantage in midfielder areas - heightened by the presence of the most dominant midfielder of all time, and someone who can lay a genuine claim to being the joint best player on the pitch:

“Alfredo Di Stéfano was simultaneously, the anchor in defence, the playmaker in midfield, and the most dangerous marksman in attack. He was the entire orchestra.” — Helenio Herrera

“Who is this man? He takes the ball from the goalkeeper; he tells the full-backs what to do; wherever he is on the field he is in position to take the ball; you can see his influence on everything that is happening… I had never seen such a complete footballer.” — Sir Bobby Charlton

World - Player of the Century
4.Alfredo di Stéfano (Argentina) 1215

Di Stéfano will be in his element here as the omnipresent midfield general - collecting the ball from deep and instigating attacks, feeding Garrincha and Best and Pelé, providing surging runs through the middle. A fantastic technical player and wonderful passer who allied ferocious determination and field coverage, with winning mentality and leadership, he has the perfect complement behind him in José Andrade - who was being saved for the final alongwith Nesta (initially).

For this match, we felt Andrade was a better fit that Redondo (not that it matters anymore) given his work-rate on and off the ball, and expertise as a box-to-box midfielder (which unleashes his full dynamic potential). Particularly considering his stature as a GOAT tier half-back, the familiarity with peeling wide on the occasion to help on the flank (another impediment for Cristiano), his athleticism and tackling nous and physical prowess and technique and so forth. With Brehme being a player who relied more on cerebral movement, positioning and timing of delivery than bombing forward perpetually, Andrade is a tantalizing fit in the team with The Don.

World - Player of the Century
29. José Leonardo Andrade (Uruguay) 74

The man completing the midfield trio is one of the greatest defensive midfield destroyers of all time, who will help anchor the center and lend great physicality and leadership with fellow Uruguayan legend, Andrade.

The Uruguayan party weren’t just wary. They were petrified. The Brazilians had, after all, put seven past Sweden and six past Spain in their last two games. And there was high expectation that the hosts would do the same to Uruguay. That day’s Rio papers had printed a photo of the side with the headline “Today, Brazil wins the World Cup”.

But, in the highly intimidating surroundings of a packed Maracana, Varela’s influence went beyond mere instruction and inspiration. There’s arguably never been a single player that has so dominated a World Cup final. Varela had a huge psychological effect on his team.

Certainly, Varela was winning the battle. As Brian Glanville wrote “it was now Varela who bestrode the field, nonchalant and indomitable, masterfully breaking up and launching attacks, the old-school centre-half par excellence.”

4. DEFENSIVE FORTRESS LED BY A HOST OF GREAT FIELD GENERALS

The backline is stacked with quality and very difficult to improve upon - Facchetti and Baresi in particular have legitimate claims to being the best fullback and the best center back of all time.

On the right, Andreas Brehme is that same caliber and remains one of only five fullbacks in history to be finish in the top three of the Ballon d'Or - as well as winning Player of the Year in a peak Serie A league featuring the likes of Maradona, Maldini, Baresi, Rijkaard and co. He's absolutely capable of dominating the flank and has a history of performing on the biggest occasions with his deep ball prowess, marking, Rory Delap throw-ins and crossing ability.

Rounding off the defense is the indomitable Alessandro Nesta.

He won 5th European footballer of the year in 2000, was the best defender in the world in early 2000s which he won defender of the year almost every season. He was known for pace, strength, tackling, positional sense, tactical awareness, vision and technical ability unbecoming of a central defender – to name but a few of his qualities. He is a centre forward’s worst nightmare – a defender with no weaknesses to exploit. - @Enigma_87



Overall, the defense is filled to the brim with technical quality, defensive ability and outstanding leadership, enabling us to bottle-neck the attack zones and using the game reading/positional expertise of all 4 to our advantage.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

@harms @Invictus @Theon All the best.

@Rado_N Usual poll please. Thanks in advance.

 

[Rado_N]

Polled

 

[Invictus]

With Redondo’s sudden departure the whole structure of Invictus’ team had taken a sudden blow. He is left with only one genuine central midfielder in Varela and he will be forced to improvise - either by introducing Zizinho to the team as a right-sided attacking midfielder (the best choice, imo), or by playing L. Andrade out of position (anto will be quoted in the game if needed). I’m assuming that he won’t play Passarella as an emergency midfielder. Di Stefano is, first and foremost, a forward - who likes to drop deep and help out midfield, but even with his all-roundness and stamina full-time midfield role will limit his attacking influence - and Zizinho, from what I gathered about him when I picked him in earlier draft, is a very all-rounded right inside forward/attacking midfielder. Overall, two players sacrificing their natural game for the team balance is too much at this stage.

Ok.

Top 50

01. RIJKAARD, Frank (Netherlands)
02. ANDRADE, José Leandro (Uruguay)
03. MONTI, Luis (Argentina)
04. VARELA, Obdulio (Uruguay)

An imposing Uruguayan defensive midfielder, Andrade worked as a shoeshiner, carnival musician and according to some reports, a gigolo, before going on to become the finest player of his era and one of the most important men in the history of the game.

I'd rather have a holding midfielder that unleashes Matthäus and Andrade to add their energy and drive to the finesse of those upfront.

For all the talk about Andrade at DM, he is probably about the right man to have there supporting Cafú against Charlton and Rivelino.

ALL eyes will probably be on Luis Suarez and Edinson Cavani when England play Uruguay on June 19. A few hearts and minds could well be elsewhere . . . on an incredible midfield icon by the name of Jose Andrade

 

[harms]

Re: Andrade role

If the all-time draft finale playing someone out of position should be considered as a weakness, imo.

Sorry mate, but it's precisely the arrow to the centre I have a fundamental problem with. He wasn't a holding midfielder. Outside halfbacks were either the same as fullbacks when they had no attacking game or more like modern wingbacks/wide midfielders when they did (a diamond would really suit them actually). The difference in roles is significant.

Think about it, the oppo also played five forwards:

------------Inside Right--------------Inside left
Outside right------------Centreforward-----------Outside left

vs

-----Left-half----------Centre-half----------Right-half
--------------Fullback--------------Fullback

Now, the fullbacks will naturally pick the centreforward and you want one spare for cover. The left-half's detail clearly is the right winger and the right-half's the left winger, while keeping an eye on the space between CF and Outside R/L, which was bound to be attacked by the Inside Forwards. When the play is on the opposite wing they will tuck in and be more mindful of the inside forward than the winger (typically somewhere in between to have time to react either way). That's almost to a T what a fullbacks' defensive job is today.

Now the centrehalf is a completely different player and more akin to the modern DM type you are looking for. The cover requirements at the back mean he is technically outnumbered here: there's no No.10 man-marking mission like a Makelele would do but instead he has to pick up the inside forward closest to the action, keep the shape and if he gets the ball shepherd him into a cul-de-sac out wide or, even better, disposses him.

It's a completely different job, the space to cover, the positional awareness required, it's all completely different and you would know it from seeing the countless experimental midfield arrangements we've had over the last few years. Phil Jones anyone? He makes a decent fullback but is all over the shop when played as a central DM.

I do think Andrade had the requisite awareness, but he is completely unproven in the lone central role and in an all-time draft where anyone can be picked that's fecking criminal, particularly when the other two stellar midfielders clearly called for a holding one so they could have greater freedom to do all the damage. You didn't need Andrade's damage. If you want the best out of him you want him as a wide midfielder, but then you are paying a disservice to one or both of the others (which is where I disagree with @Chesterlestreet, as he says, Matthäus is a complete midfielder who can do almost anything so I'd rather sacrifice him a bit asking him to contribute defensively to release Didí from a duty he was notoriously averse to, Zito performed a level of heavy-lifting Andrade is unlikely to provide here).

Unless you got a horrendous draw, you should be fine anyway. It's not exactly a disaster, it just means getting a bit less than the sum of parts in what is a very strong unit anyway.

Now they have three wide players on the right. I already said about Brehme - Garrincha pairing as I don't see them working faultlessly like Facchetti - Best on the left, for example. Brehme on the right played more like the orthodox wing/fullback, mostly overlapping and crossing, and with Garrincha rarely cutting inside (which is supposed to be one of their tactical advantages) overlapping fullback is not the optimal choice here. Plus, Andrade is basically a right wingback too - now they have three players on the same flank who, at their best, controlled the whole wing by themselves (well, without the defensive part in Garrincha's case) - it's a clasterfeck, really - at least as I see it.

 

[Moby]

Is that Top 50 list copied from BigSoccer?

 

[Moby]

What exactly is Di Stefano's role here? Is he playing further up as a centre forward or part of the midfield as a deeper playmaker? Seems important as to what positions he will take specially considering that Pelé isn't your traditional number 9 and would drop deep himself.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Don't really see the problem in Andrade role. Even going by the quote of anto's above a diamond should suit them perfectly. With Varela doing the defensive duties, I don't see Andrade's role any different than a regular diamond tbh.

 

[Invictus]

With all due respect to that post, he does mention the right sided diamond midfielder role, harms. I see no reason how that's different from what he's playing here. Andrade is in his peak right sided box-to-box role, here he has the tactical freedom to do justice to it. And reg. the clusterfeck - Brehme was equally comfortable moving up to just the halfway line, he wasn't your Alves type surge forward at every occasion player. His great positional awareness, the 'German gene' to function in a way suited to the game, and deliveries from the deep in particular will be awesome in this match - while he also keeping tabs on Cristiano. I see bigger feckups if Cafu abandons Best to supply the width your right side desperately needs. Ditto on the other side - Cristiano will come in over and over again, and if Nilton supplies the kind of width you describe, that's great - because Garrincha will relish going up against an attacking wingback.

 

[Deleted member 101472]

@harms tell me more about zito. I don't know an awful lot about him , but if he did for that 1958 team what he would do in this game then it's the perfect foil for the attacking creativity in your team .

 

[harms]

Countless IFFHS and Ballon D'Or ratings, as usual
Can't say that I find the opponent's team flawless - like I said, I prefer Andrade in a more wideish role, while here he is playing in a midfield two with the free-roaming Di Stefano.
Plus, while they are playing a young version of Pele, he still preferred to run at defenders with the ball from the deep, even then

But we cannot compare Pele and Maradona with Cristiano because we were players who came from behind. We played deeper. He plays in front. He's more like (the Brazilian) Ronaldo. This you can compare.

Zidane and Zico were the most similar players to me

And even when I looked up Santos vs Penarol games, although they were closer to his 1970 peak, he looked almost like Di Stefano without the defensive side of his game though, he constantly dropped back to midfield or even holding midfield area.

 

[Moby]

Both teams filled with quite a few tactical flaws and mismatches in terms of playing styles and chemistry but you'd expect that in an all star game with players from all eras. IT's defense seems pretty much prepared for this game and if Facchetti manages to get a grip on Messi that would be a big blow for harms. On the other hand Zito operating directly against Don Alfredo seems quite a telling factor and could provide IT's attack with quite a few chances, and I agree with Invictus that both Cafu and Nilton have the onus of providing width on them and while it worked great in a 5 man backline, here it could be quite wreckless against the two greatest wingers of all time. In fact even if they don't attack all the time they'd likely lose the battle against those two over the course of 90 minutes, with the sort of service coming from Di Stefano. 2/3-1 to IT.

 

[harms]

@harms tell me more about zito. I don't know an awful lot about him , but if he did for that 1958 team what he would do in this game then it's the perfect foil for the attacking creativity in your team .

Zito was a colossal influence; a commanding if somewhat unsung presence in midfield as Brazil emerged as the ultimate force in international football, winning the World Cup for the first time in 1958 and retaining it in 1962.

While headlines were dominated by the prodigious talents of team-mates such as Pele and Garrincha, and understandably so, the neat, pragmatic, impeccably organised wing-half was invariably instrumental in creating the platform from which the stars dazzled.

Zito was a strong, intelligent character who won tackles and made simple passes, entering the limelight only occasionally. The most decisive such occasion was when he started and finished the move which put the Selecao in front after conceding an early lead to Czechoslovakia in the 1962 final in Santiago, Chile, nodding home an Amarildo cross on the way to a 3-1 triumph.

Four years earlier, in Sweden, he had been integral to the 5-2 victory over the host nation in the Stockholm final, and he went on to collect 52 caps in an international career which stretched from 1955 to 1964.

At domestic level, too, Zito was hugely successful, helping Santos – his only senior club, for whom he scored 57 goals in more than 700 appearances between 1952 and 1967 – to win 22 major trophies. These included the Copa Libertadores twice, in 1962 and 1963, and the Sao Paulo state championship nine times.

Later, he served Santos splendidly behind the scenes, being credited with the discovery of future top performers such as Robinho and current Barcelona hero Neymar. With Zito's death, Pele and Mario Zagallo are the last survivors of the great 1958 side.

It was basically like this - offensive genius Didi run further forward almost to the right inside role, Pele to the left and Zito was left as an anchorman, as a defensive foundation for all that offensive brilliance. His introduction to the 1958 team was crucial, it was only then they found the perfect balance - and in 1962 he was chosen into the team of the tournament.

Plus, he has more than 800 games for Pele's Santos, captaining this side and being a father figure for Pele. His nickname was Gerente (manager), because of his organizing skills.

 

[harms]

Both teams filled with quite a few tactical flaws and mismatches in terms of playing styles and chemistry but you'd expect that in an all star game with players from all eras. IT's defense seems pretty much prepared for this game and if Facchetti manages to get a grip on Messi that would be a big blow for harms. On the other hand Zito operating directly against Don Alfredo seems quite a telling factor and could provide IT's attack with quite a few chances, and I agree with Invictus that both Cafu and Nilton have the onus of providing width on them and while it worked great in a 5 man backline, here it could be quite wreckless against the two greatest wingers of all time. In fact even if they don't attack all the time they'd likely lose the battle against those two over the course of 90 minutes, with the sort of service coming from Di Stefano. 2/3-1 to IT.

Not sure how you can assume that Facchetti will get a grip on Messi - he had quite a few games when he was absolutely destroyed by many players - like 7:1 Borussia game or the games against USSR with Chislenko etc. Facchetti isn't as good as Maldini defensively and I'm not even sure that Maldini would've been enough.

On the other hand, we have a dedicated DM (and one of the most decorated water-carriers in the history of the game) to cover Di Stefano, but you shouldn't discount Masopust or Suarez either, who both had a great engine and defensive nous. Suarez especially had quite a few successful games against Di Stefano's Madrid, for Barca and for Inter - being the main reason behind Madrid's first European defeat and winning the EC final with Inter against him

 

[Deleted member 101472]

Zito was a colossal influence; a commanding if somewhat unsung presence in midfield as Brazil emerged as the ultimate force in international football, winning the World Cup for the first time in 1958 and retaining it in 1962.

While headlines were dominated by the prodigious talents of team-mates such as Pele and Garrincha, and understandably so, the neat, pragmatic, impeccably organised wing-half was invariably instrumental in creating the platform from which the stars dazzled.

Zito was a strong, intelligent character who won tackles and made simple passes, entering the limelight only occasionally. The most decisive such occasion was when he started and finished the move which put the Selecao in front after conceding an early lead to Czechoslovakia in the 1962 final in Santiago, Chile, nodding home an Amarildo cross on the way to a 3-1 triumph.

Four years earlier, in Sweden, he had been integral to the 5-2 victory over the host nation in the Stockholm final, and he went on to collect 52 caps in an international career which stretched from 1955 to 1964.

At domestic level, too, Zito was hugely successful, helping Santos – his only senior club, for whom he scored 57 goals in more than 700 appearances between 1952 and 1967 – to win 22 major trophies. These included the Copa Libertadores twice, in 1962 and 1963, and the Sao Paulo state championship nine times.

Later, he served Santos splendidly behind the scenes, being credited with the discovery of future top performers such as Robinho and current Barcelona hero Neymar. With Zito's death, Pele and Mario Zagallo are the last survivors of the great 1958 side.

It was basically like this - offensive genius Didi run further forward almost to the right inside role, Pele to the left and Zito was left as an anchorman, as a defensive foundation for all that offensive brilliance. His introduction to the 1958 team was crucial, it was only then they found the perfect balance - and in 1962 he was chosen into the team of the tournament.

Plus, he has more than 800 games for Pele's Santos, captaining this side and being a father figure for Pele. His nickname was Gerente (manager), because of his organizing skills.

Love it , he fits your team perfectly.

 

[Moby]

On the other hand, we have a dedicated DM (and one of the most decorated water-carriers in the history of the game) to cover Di Stefano,

With all due respect to Zito, he has very little chance of winning that duel.

Suarez especially had quite a few successful games against Di Stefano's Madrid, for Barca and for Inter

You mean when Di Stefano was close to being 40 years old? Pretty sure this is the peak younger version of him.

Anyway, you can basically contradict each and every argument that will be made in such a match if you want to, every player here is here because they performed great at the highest level, and there would be no point in discussing if you bring forward someone's achievements the minute someone argues that they will lose a 1v1 battle for example. But it is a match, and someone will win and someone will lose. In theory it is impossible to make any predictions with the players on show but we have to, so there we go. I prefer to explain my vote instead of not, and in that I will in a match like this will have to talk about some of the greatest players ever being the reason for a defeat, that's just how it is. I hope you take it in the right spirit.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Hm. Yes, that Andrade thing - again.

I don't know, honestly. It's a matter of interpretation.

That winghalf role in the 2-3-5 is different from what it became after the CH dropped down (Chapman style). My take on it is that the latter is a midfielder (anything from a destroyer to a box-to-boxer) - whereas the former is harder to translate directly into modern terms.

Add to this that Andrade wasn't a run-of-the-mill player to begin with - but someone who in many ways transcended the basic role, and it becomes very difficult to nail him down to a particular position in a more or less modern setup.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

With all due respect to Zito, he has very little chance of winning that duel.

May I know why? Is it because of Zito's playing style?
Gentile and Stiles have proven that the marker can be a less stellar player, but still very effective in marking out a GOAT.

 

[Invictus]

I don't think this adds anything, really. It's like saying Van Basten won't operate without a Gullit, and he's wasted because Messi and Ronaldo needed facilitators so he'll be reduced to a donkey hold-up role - rather than his imperious role for Milan and Holland. Considering the overall complexions of the teams is more important here, as well as extracting the best possible qualities from their skillset without killing the balance completely - than strict formation guidelines where the players were playing with different personnel. You don't have to adhere to a formulaic approach at this stage. I think both Van Basten and Pelé are suited to the role in their teams here, FWIW.

 

[Moby]

May I know why? Is it because of Zito's playing style?
Gentile and Stiles have proven that the marker can be a less stellar player, but still very effective in marking out a GOAT.

Just like I explained to harms, there are countless examples of a top player being restricted by a lesser talented player, and countless those of him having dominated the best of opposition and become the legends that they are. Which ones do we go with? It doesn't help whatsoever if we are going to look at individual incidents and take them as hard evidence, this is what I said in the last semi when IT were scared of putting out Nesta just because of one match, it doesn't matter if he got owned in one match, he has the rest of his fecking career to show what he can do and has done and no one in their right minds would disregard that. And also like I said earlier, there's no hard and fast predictions here, there's no disparity of quality anywhere on the pitch to make a prediction with complete certainly, it is down to personal preferences at this point and tactical decisions. Over a course of 10 odd games I don't see Zito coming close to stopping Di Stefano's influence over the game given his defensive prowess and the records of both the players. Honestly, if someone gets overly defensive over that much criticism, then it really can't be helped.

 

[harms]

I don't think this adds anything, really. It's like saying Van Basten won't operate without a Gullit, and he's wasted because Messi and Ronaldo needed facilitators so he'll be reduced to a donkey hold-up role - rather than his imperious role for Milan and Holland. Considering the overall complexions of the teams is more important here, as well as extracting the best possible qualities from their skillset without killing the balance completely - than strict formation guidelines where the players were playing with different personnel. You don't have to adhere to a formulaic approach at this stage. I think both Van Basten and Pelé are suited to the role in their teams here, FWIW.

Not sure what are you talking about, this formation explains Zito's roles and it wasn't about how Pele needs him or anyone else for that matter to shine

 

[harms]

My main criticism is the thing that no one except for me seems to view as a weakness so fair enough - but I'll still say it. Garrincha, Di Stefano, Pele, Best and even Andrade (who once dribbled past 7 players in the game) all want the ball and they are all here for their on the ball skills first and foremost, but there is only one ball and my team will also try to take control of it. But off the ball neither of them are at their best - they still can do the job as all of those are the greatest footballers ever, but Madrid's Ronaldo with his runs behind the defence is the biggest off the ball threat here, same for van Basten, who is the only pure 9 on the pitch - you need off the ball movement for your attack to succeed, while I don't see any one of that front 4 sacrificing himself for the team.

Even the greatest did it - for example Puskas, when he came to Madrid, noticed Di Stefano's style of play and his urge to be the best player in the squad and he simplified his game, becoming less of an all-round forward and more of a poacher, leaving the rest to Di Stefano. Will Pele sacrifice himself? Or Garrincha? I don't think so.

 

[harms]

Just like I explained to harms, there are countless examples of a top player being restricted by a lesser talented player, and countless those of him having dominated the best of opposition and become the legends that they are. Which ones do we go with? It doesn't help whatsoever if we are going to look at individual incidents and take them as hard evidence, this is what I said in the last semi when IT were scared of putting out Nesta just because of one match, it doesn't matter if he got owned in one match, he has the rest of his fecking career to show what he can do and has done and no one in their right minds would disregard that. And also like I said earlier, there's no hard and fast predictions here, there's no disparity of quality anywhere on the pitch to make a prediction with complete certainly, it is down to personal preferences at this point and tactical decisions. Over a course of 10 odd games I don't see Zito coming close to stopping Di Stefano's influence over the game given his defensive prowess and the records of both the players. Honestly, if someone gets overly defensive over that much criticism, then it really can't be helped.

But Di Stefano isn't playing just against Zito, he plays against my whole midfield, with Masopust and Suarez being more than capable defensively. There won't be much free space there for Di Stefano to operate and it certainly won't be a 1 on 1 duel, I'm not suicidal

 

[Invictus]

But Di Stefano isn't playing just against Zito, he plays against my whole midfield, with Masopust and Suarez being more than capable defensively. There won't be much free space there for Di Stefano to operate and it certainly won't be a 1 on 1 duel, I'm not suicidal

Di Stéfano's primary opponent here is Zito, mate - that cannot be refuted given the structure of the respective teams. Yes, Di Stéfano is playing against 3 midfielder, but that goes both ways, given the two behind him to provide a platform (of sorts). If you sacrifice the entire entire setup to contain him, Andrade will run riot with his blend of physicality and technique. Suárez and Masopust did defensive work to a degree, but unless you want them to be pulled out of their primary zones over and over again (I'm presuming that Masopust will also have to help Nilton with Garrincha down the left channel), they won't be helping THAT much in terms of defensive work to contain Di Stéfano. Bear in mind that Di Stéfano was arguably the most perceptive manipulator of space in football with Cruyff. He can easily use the resultant positional lapses to feed the others.

 

[Enigma_87]

I take it Invictus/Theon are using young Pele here? Pele always played off a striker, whether even be a "false" striker(number 9 or whatever) and he himself liked to drop deep and get the ball. I posted one interview in my game against harms I think, where he explains how he was the 3rd striker in the team usually. Not that he won't flourish in that role, mind, but it's a personal preference to have another CF in there combining with him. Having him in more of a #10.5 role for what is worth.

The Andrade debate - he's a midfielder, I often see him as right back and having in mind all the research in the past I've done on him he's more certainly more of a midfielder than a defender in the oldie formations, and especially when you consider a flat back 4 behind him.

Now the debate here whether he's a right midfielder or central midfielder is interesting, I believe he is a bit of both - operating on the right, but box to box and often cutting inside. Can he play in that role that I/T have put him into? I believe he can and don't think he's out of position. Whether he's the best fit in an all time context final - that's another matter.

To me I/T indeed had a huge blow with Redondo sitting out this one, harms midfield for me is a better fit, although I/T having the star man there in Di Stefano.

From first sight I like harms team slightly more. I/T on the other hand have a jizz worthy front four, with the only question mark how will AdS and Pele work together - something I wondered myself during the auction process, tbh.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

There won't be much free space there for Di Stefano to operate and it certainly won't be a 1 on 1 duel, I'm not suicidal

Given the setup as such, it shouldn't create a fatal imbalance even if Di Stefano does drive past Zito (which he obviously will sooner or later in a "duel" scenario): The way this would presumably work, it certainly doesn't seem like a tactical weakness. Zito plays as a pretty standard DM here - he protects the back four, as they say. He doesn't shadow Di Stefano in the capacity of a marker who is fecked if Di Stefano shakes him off.

 

[Gio]

Some teams. Losing Redondo was a blessing in disguise as I'd have fancied Messi to have tied him in knots. Andrade offers less positional security to the midfield, which would present some issues with Masopust slithering through there, but he also brings some more high-calibre quality going forward.

Just like I explained to harms, there are countless examples of a top player being restricted by a lesser talented player, and countless those of him having dominated the best of opposition and become the legends that they are. Which ones do we go with? It doesn't help whatsoever if we are going to look at individual incidents and take them as hard evidence, this is what I said in the last semi when IT were scared of putting out Nesta just because of one match, it doesn't matter if he got owned in one match, he has the rest of his fecking career to show what he can do and has done and no one in their right minds would disregard that.

Even though I think Nesta was a better choice because he'd be more disciplined inbetween a pair of ball carriers, the previous examples are informative. Not rock-solid certainties, but guiding enough to suggest that peak Ronaldo or whoever would probably have the beating of said player, given the right opportunities, etc.

I see bigger feckups if Cafu abandons Best to supply the width your right side desperately needs. Ditto on the other side - Cristiano will come in over and over again, and if Nilton supplies the kind of width you describe, that's great - because Garrincha will relish going up against an attacking wingback.

That dynamic works both ways though. It's unlikely Garrincha will track Nilton Santos which is likely to lead to an overload on Brehme. And inevitably that leads to the classic draft OMG moment when Garrincha is left free high up the park. But generally that is less likely to be influential than what happens when a team has control of the ball - otherwise all teams would leave all their sexy attackers the wrong side of the ball.

 

[Invictus]

That dynamic works both ways though. It's unlikely Garrincha will track Nilton Santos which is likely to lead to an overload on Brehme. And inevitably that leads to the classic draft OMG moment when Garrincha is left free high up the park. But generally that is less likely to be influential than what happens when a team has control of the ball - otherwise all teams would leave all their sexy attackers the wrong side of the ball.

Yes, I agree with you on that, Gio, no doubt about it - it goes both ways, and both set of fullback have an arduous task at hand. As mentioned in the OP, given the caliber of wide attacker in this match, the margin for error with be extremely small and we're not claiming that our wide set is definitively better than his.

That said, our primary point was that even if we sit Facchetti and Brehme slightly deeper to counter Messi and Ronaldo's threat, Best and Garrincha don't need their contribution (in terms of overlapping and forward forays) to the degree Ronaldo and Messi do from Nilton and Cafu, given that Best and Garrincha were more classic wingers. And with our fullbacks having the remit to play a slightly deeper role, we think we have the opposition attack trio covered (in relative terms) especially with Baresi and Nesta in the center. You could argue that Facchetti is probably the best defender to counter Messi (apart from Maldini). And Cristiano is up against Brehme (who will play a slightly conservative role given the opposition), with Andrade also chipping in with some defensive work from time to time.

Another minor detail (won't make much of a difference, but still) - Messi comes in on his left foot, so Facchetti is better suited to the job as a right footed defender. Whereas Nilton is a right footed defender against a right footed winger. Brehme was great with both feet - offensively and defensively - so he can use the 'stronger' foot when Ronaldo climbs onto the left sided pocket. Whereas Cafu (being a primarily right footed defender) will be backtracking when Best goes in. Dunno if it's of any significance, but I just like the balance there.

 

[Gio]

Another minor detail (won't make much of a difference, but still) - Messi comes in on his left foot, so Facchetti is better suited to the job as a right footed defender. Whereas Nilton is a right footed defender against a right footed winger. Brehme was great with both feet - offensively and defensively - so he can use the 'stronger' foot when Ronaldo climbs onto the left sided pocket. Whereas Cafu (being a primarily right footed defender) will be backtracking when Best goes in. Dunno if it's of any significance, but I just like the balance there.

Yeah I agree with that and it will make a difference with any dribbler who cuts inside onto their stronger feet.

 

[harms]

You could argue that Facchetti is probably the best defender to counter Messi (apart from Maldini)

I don't think that it's right - if you're counting even such details as right-left footedness, you should also count that Messi's center of gravity makes him an awful fit to Facchetti, who, for all his defensive stature, simply doesn't have the agility to turn as fast as Messi does and to handle the little dribbler. Someone like Vogts on the left would've been better suited to the job, imo.

 

[Gio]

I don't think that it's right - if you're counting even such details as right-left footedness, you should also count that Messi's center of gravity makes him an awful fit to Facchetti, who, for all his defensive stature, simply doesn't have the agility to turn as fast as Messi does and to handle the little dribbler. Someone like Vogts on the left would've been better suited to the job, imo.

Agree with that too. Build is important in these things. I recall how Lillian Thuram was bamboozled by the midget Pedro Munitis and his nimble feet at Euro 2000, yet would squash many of the big powerhouses. And on that note arguably Cristiano Ronaldo could get some joy against Brehme given the relative discrepancies in their size, strength and dynamism.

 

[Ecstatic]

Agree with that too. Build is important in these things. I recall how Lillian Thuram was bamboozled by the midget Pedro Munitis and his nimble feet at Euro 2000, yet would squash many of the big powerhouses. And on that note arguably Cristiano Ronaldo could get some joy against Brehme given the relative discrepancies in their size, strength and dynamism.

Munitis was fouled by Thuram in the penalty area and Mendieta scored the penalty

 

[Invictus]

I don't think that it's right - if you're counting even such details as right-left footedness, you should also count that Messi's center of gravity makes him an awful fit to Facchetti, who, for all his defensive stature, simply doesn't have the agility to turn as fast as Messi does and to handle the little dribbler. Someone like Vogts on the left would've been better suited to the job, imo.

Yes, don't disagree with that, mate. Facchetti and Nilton will have their work cut out for them against small, agile attackers like Messi or Garrincha - in terms of physical profile. Furthermore, even if the defenders do their best for 90 mins. it takes only a momentary lapse for the attackers to decide the match. It's a thankless job, all things considered.

Agree with that too. Build is important in these things. I recall how Lillian Thuram was bamboozled by the midget Pedro Munitis and his nimble feet at Euro 2000, yet would squash many of the big powerhouses. And on that note arguably Cristiano Ronaldo could get some joy against Brehme given the relative discrepancies in their size, strength and dynamism.

Don't disagree with this either. Though to piggyback on this comment, this is kinda why I'm glad we have Andrade for this match. Redondo would've struggled against Messi, and I don't think he'd have added a lot in terms of peeling wide to stop Ronaldo. Andrade's a much better fit from that perspective - given his athleticism and power, without compromising on quality. He can chip in from time to time in terms of containing Ronaldo on the inside right channel, considering that he essentially blanked out opposition inside left channels:

• 1924 final, against a free-scoring Switzerland. Their star player, Abegglen was the tournament top scorer so far. He operated at inside left, Andrade shut him out: 3-0.

• 1928 final, against eternal rivals Argentina. Top scorer of the tournament Tarasconi, inside left, shut out. 1-1 and 2-1 (no ET or penos then), both Argentine goals came from the other flank.

• 1930 final, again against Argentina, who had the tournos top scorer again (a CF though). Andrade was man of the match keeping Uruguay in the game while still 2-1 down and at 2-2. Both goals scored from the left flank again.

Credit: antohan

Ooh, and another snippet reg Andrade:

He was immense and had the attributes to do a job either on the right of a DM pair or at fullback.

Also via antohan.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

The foot thing is obviously something of a parenthesis but for the record Nilton was, AFAIK, if not two-footed then certainly close to it. So, I doubt that he'd have any trouble using his weaker foot effectively in the relevant scenario.

Best was pretty much two-footed as well - but I suppose that if the scenario is that he cuts inside, and Cafu has to defend against him in that particular situation, Best would be more likely to use his right (he was right footed, as such, if memory serves). So, yes - that would be a right/right encounter.

 

[Moby]

Even though I think Nesta was a better choice because he'd be more disciplined inbetween a pair of ball carriers, the previous examples are informative. Not rock-solid certainties, but guiding enough to suggest that peak Ronaldo or whoever would probably have the beating of said player, given the right opportunities, etc.

It really depends on what we are talking about and differs from example to example. I argued the same in the Vidic - Torres thing when people would assume Torres would destroy him whenever they play. Simply doesn't make sense, if you disregard everything else like Fergie playing a terribly high line, Ferdinand not being the last defender given he's the faster one, etc. Even in a tactical scenario, a one off is more than likely to happen and doesn't dictate every future meeting of the said players.

I am just entirely opposed to single cherry picked evidence in support of argument, period. Discuss playing styles, attributes, skills sets and how often the player brought them forward, how many times on the highest level did that happen, basically take a much large scale wider representation of a player's career and take that into account. Instead of looking of games like the Milan 4-1 Napoli and arguing Maradona would be repeating that. He may, or may not, completely depends on the match in question and not the one that had infinite number of differences in terms of players, tactics, conditions, scenario, situation, what not. In this case I barely paid much attention when harms brought forward examples of Facchetti's team conceding goals. Yes he conceded 7 goals in the game and conceded 4 in a WC final - so what? Has Messi never played a game where he hasn't been shut down or been quiet and not contributing anything? Wouldn't take long to go back and bring out names like Jose Bosingwa or whoever the feck it was who defended against a peak Messi under Pep successfully, without even looking at his 4 failed finals and saying how Facchetti is much better than those players and do a better job.

The drafts really have been plagued with this sort of arguments over a period of time and it's a pretty pathetic way of downplaying a player. What's the point on bringing out incidents which clearly count as exceptions to the larger narrative of the player - just like Nesta being destroyed by a striker and disregarding what the guy did for the rest of his entire career.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

It really depends on what we are talking about and differs from example to example. I argued the same in the Vidic - Torres thing when people would assume Torres would destroy him whenever they play. Simply doesn't make sense, if you disregard everything else like Fergie playing a terribly high line, Ferdinand not being the last defender given he's the faster one, etc. Even in a tactical scenario, a one off is more than likely to happen and doesn't dictate every future meeting of the said players.

I am just entirely opposed to single cherry picked evidence in support of argument, period. Discuss playing styles, attributes, skills sets and how often the player brought them forward, how many times on the highest level did that happen, basically take a much large scale wider representation of a player's career and take that into account. Instead of looking of games like the Milan 4-1 Napoli and arguing Maradona would be repeating that. He may, or may not, completely depends on the match in question and not the one that had infinite number of differences in terms of players, tactics, conditions, scenario, situation, what not. In this case I barely paid much attention when harms brought forward examples of Facchetti's team conceding goals. Yes he conceded 7 goals in the game and conceded 4 in a WC final - so what? Has Messi never played a game where he hasn't been shut down or been quiet and not contributing anything? Wouldn't take long to go back and bring out names like Jose Bosingwa or whoever the feck it was who defended against a peak Messi under Pep successfully, without even looking at his 4 failed finals and saying how Facchetti is much better than those players and do a better job.

The drafts really have been plagued with this sort of arguments over a period of time and it's a pretty pathetic way of downplaying a player. What's the point on bringing out incidents which clearly count as exceptions to the larger narrative of the player - just like Nesta being destroyed by a striker and disregarding what the guy did for the rest of his entire career.

Agreed - fully.

Pointing to a specific match, against a specific player, is only relevant (and fair) if it serves to illustrate a general flaw (or strength, for that matter): Something which is typical of the player.

If not, it's pointless. It completely disregards the most basic premise of these fantasy games, namely that the players should be considered at their peak. An obvious - and very plausible - counter argument to "X destroyed Y" is "Y had a bad day at the office - he won't be having that here". You can even substitute "bad" for "not top" - and the argument still works. Because here he will presumably have a top day at the office - nothing less.

 

[harms]

In this case I barely paid much attention when harms brought forward examples of Facchetti's team conceding goals. Yes he conceded 7 goals in the game and conceded 4 in a WC final - so what? Has Messi never played a game where he hasn't been shut down or been quiet and not contributing anything?

I agree to your argument but Facchetti isn't known as the best defensive fullback in history - he was an elite defender (which I would argue isn't enough to stop Messi though) with unreal offensive contribution, it's his allroundness that made him one of the best ever. Defensively he had quite a few games when he was a little suspect - certainly the most from the very top fullbacks that I've seen full games of (maybe I just wasn't lucky enough).

Plus the center of gravity argument.

I was quite surprised with the argument that Facchetti can neutralize Messi while Zito can't do the same with Di Stefano - they both can do it on their day (and when the argentinians are off form or not in the mood), but I don't think that their chances of handling their opponent are that different (and they are quite small)

 

[Ecstatic]

You should take a step back on the videos/gifs that are only used for illustrative purposes only or to tell some stories. Nothing more.

I think there is a slight difference between the 2 followings sentences:

Sentence A: 'I have the feeling that the player can shine here because I am a pundit'
Sentence B: 'I have the feeling that the player can shine here because he has made many top performances - in real life - against this specific player of relatively similar opponents'.

In any case, sentences A & B have not a scientific significance/validity and - of course - any player has a superb CV.

When a player is criticized, the idea is not to say he is a bad player but rather to express his (fair or unfair) concerns about his ability to shine.

Some suggestions for the next draft:

- We could simply ban gifs/youtube videos
- We could introduce some rules like 'If there is a game between manager A and manager B. Then, A has not the right to criticize B, and vice versa'.
- We could change the nature of a game and just consider the thread as a Q&A session between the managers and the voters.

So, I think harms should write something like 'Dear Invictus, I love your team and I love you' and Invictus to reply 'I love you too and you have a better team'.

Yeah, why so much hate? Why so much violence?

 

[Ecstatic]

Because Love is boring ?