The Double Draft - QF: harms vs Enigma
- Thread starter Edgar Allan Pillow
- Start date
Masopust is pretty much the best ever at this particular aspect
You are underestimating his creativity, although with Xavi on your side you definitely have the edge overall.
Dzajic shouldn't be discounted though, he offers something no one else does and Bergomi isn't a panacea, especially when your Nedved is going to face Maldini most of the time.
Both strong teams with few weaknesses. The quality of both teams is very similar. Only real chinks for me are firstly the similarity of Chumpitaz and Cannavaro and their collective lack of height against two aerial monsters in Ronaldo and Pele. Both defenders were very springy though, squat, dynamic - they still compete but there is a goal there potentially. The second would be Enigma's left flank against a Cafu and Messi combination. Equally though Nilton and Ronaldo ganging up on Cafu could be tasty as well. I'd agree that Tigana is a box-to-box central midfielder, but in fairness to Enigma he says:
Which seems fair to me. And what you have in practice is a 3v3 in midfield and Engima's trio brings a lot of graft to the table. I don't necessarily agree with the Xavi criticism: his work rate and distance covered stands out even amongst the super-fit midfielders of the current game. He'd run the socks off the majority of midfielders from yore. Even battle in there though and I like Nedved getting a more central gig with the scope to blast out wide as appropriate.
In this particular case, which doesn't happen often in the real games even if there are only one or two defenders left at the back, Masopust will be tasked with handling Nedved and Maldini will help out centre backs. It's only for a few seconds anyway, considering the pace of Cafu and Bonhof
Masopust played even more restrained role in that Czech team. Nedved has the ability to close him down quickly. Messi would be the main creative force for harms team I think in a balanced formation he'll struggle a bit in that sense.
As I've said, Tigana is not played as a typical defensive midfielder or destroyer. He doesn't need to be. When needed and in space he will push forward. It's not like he has a dedicated #10 to look for or has to sit in front of the defence the whole time. He, along with Nedved IMO are the fastest midfielders on the pitch and can recover space quickest of them all.
I don't think Pele has lesser stage to shine in this game. Especially with Bonhof supporting the midfield and Nedved/Masopust pair. He would have more space than a clogged center and has every chance to decide the game. Zito alone would not stop Pele.
But do you expect him to cover for the fullbacks? He has an immense workrate but I don't think I saw him covering for Alves for example - while both Masopust and Bonhof were picked because of their hybrid positions and versatility.
re: height - it's really the only thing I'm really concerned about but, as I said, I don't think Enigma can provide enough quality delivery from the flanks, unlike Dzajic/Cafu/Bonhof for example.
The main problem is, again, the lack of cover for Santos, while Cafu has Bonhof at his side.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think Bonhof is one of the quickest midfielders around. IMO he's only pacier than Xavi in my set up.
Only 2 seconds is what I need to get that ball to Ronaldo from deep as well
The pace was certainly not his weakness, I would say it was the other way around, actually
Look at the acceleration here, for example
Same goes for Masopust - if you'll take a look at my video you'll see how often he catches up with the wingers (Garrincha included) starting from behind or accelerates with the ball doing one of his famous slaloms
Xavi covered a lot of ground at the EURO(2008). Here's another compilation. You can see plenty of tackles even sliding ones there.
I wouldn't put it as an actual example to be honest when he's running at full pelt into space for a run. When on counter it's combination of response and recovery till you reach that top speed. Nedved, Tigana are better in that sense IMO, especially Nedved.
Yeah - centrally, and my main point is that he won't help out N. Santos on the wing (he had only one tackle in that video close to the fullback zone)
One of Nedved's shiniest moments - Cross from the right to set up Juve's first goal, then bursting through to decide the game.
I don't know, I have a feeling that you haven't seen neither Bonhof nor Masopust much, given your assessments in this thread, and I can't argue with you because of that as I don't have any arguments aside from the watch the games with them.
As you can imagine, there aren't much compilations of Rainer Bonhof running back on youtube
Positionally I think Xavi did a lot of that for Barcelona. Not directly - in that he didn't go and sit on the vacated right-back position. The way Barcelona won back the battle was more subtle in the way they pressed and covered spaces. With Xavi, he was generally being behind the ball in the right-half position and was well placed to cut supply to that area of the park along with his team-mates.
I don't know, I have a feeling that you haven't seen neither Bonhof nor Masopust much, given your assessments in this thread, and I can't argue with you because of that as I don't have any arguments aside from the watch the games with them.
As you can imagine, there aren't much compilations of Rainer Bonhof running back on youtube
I've watched Bonhof, Tigana and Nedved all at international stage and in case of Tigana and Nedved at club level as well. Personally Tigana and Nedved are more dynamic duo and are better in transition stage, especially Nedved.
Masopust I've seen pretty much probably from the games you saw as well. He was deeper deployed usually in Czech formation but have read that at club level was not the same, of course the latter I am not sure.
Of course it's personal judgement, but on Bonhof I've more impressions of course.
Heh – no, I'm afraid I did the opposite. Or, not the opposite – but I didn't quite fancy Carrick for Didi in the Remake draft: I don't think Carrick in his prime (the DM version) is agile, mobile or forceful enough to cover that Didi role (if we're talking Brazil '58).
Which basically amounts to saying that Carrick simply is a level (at least) below one of the greatest defensive midfielders in history, so if anything it was a sheer compliment to Zito.
The latter is obviously fine here, just to make that clear. The whole setup looks very good and balanced.
One thing which struck me, reading the comments, is that while there is no traditional #10 there (see the Tigana discussion above) there is a player who will – in practice – operate in much the same space frequently: As I take it Messi will – simply – play his natural game here, starting out wide but moving about in a (for him) natural sort of pattern. So, defending against him isn't comparable to doing so against a winger – it's a different kettle of fish: What you're defending against is actually a false winger who will regularly drift into standard #10 territory. Messi is – obviously – not only well suited, but probably the best suited player in history, to that particular role.
Xavi is the second most industrious player in both Barcelona and Spain teams. For one unable to help out his team mates and full back in this case is first time I hear that. Again Xavi doesn't rely on flying tackles, but in his peak he was much more dynamic than what we saw 2 years ago. The example above is to show how well he covered distance but also made sliding tackles around the pitch. Of course it's a 4 minute compilation not through the whole tournament and as you may imagine Xavi is the one usually with the ball so there is plenty of coverage
Regarding "the lack of creativity" in my side. Even Dzajic and Masopust aside, I still have one of the best incisive passers in history, I would even say that in the final third Messi's passing is more dangerous than Xavi's (the latter is much better at dictating the games though)
Yep, said it a couple of times myself already
The main issue is on the counter. Further Dzajic is much more creative than you're giving him credit for. If it was me I'd have found another CM and dropped Suarez and played Nedved on the right.
Bergomi is playing a balanced defensive role in this game mate. Dzajic will be up against one of the best pure defenders in the game.
On a counter I have Bergomi/Nedved in defensive phase, while if things are reversed and Cafu is up the pitch it's Ronaldo vs Cannavaro. I think that's clear edge for me on counter.
My right side in attacking phase is Suarez and Nedved I'd say I have much better protection than one full back bombing the field and leaving Ronaldo exposed.
For all the talk of Bonhof and Masopust helping out wide, surely that would have them engaged enough so that Pele has more free space and get a lot of 1 on 1 opportunities against Zito.
He can easily match Messi's decisive role in a game like this, especially given some free space.
As far as the aerial “battle” goes, I think there's an odd tendency in these things to focus on height whenever this suits an argument. Most famous central defenders who happened to be midgets (relatively speaking) were athletic and/or otherwise excellent in the air – that's a very common theme in football history, and no surprise. A midget who is poor in the air is not likely to make it as a historically great (central) defender.
Ronaldo is deadly in the air, one of the most dangerous aerial attackers ever, and would pose a threat regardless of who you have defending against him: You'd need a physically imposing player who was also a specialist in aerial defending to claim you positively have his number, and those players are a) few and far between and b) clearly inferior to the likes of Chumpitaz in terms of their overall game.
If Ronaldo gets enough chances to score from a header, he will probably score from a header – but the question is whether he'd get enough clear-cut chances here to do so. The height of the CB pair isn't the most important part of that equation.
Ronaldo is deadly in the air, one of the most dangerous aerial attackers ever, and would pose a threat regardless of who you have defending against him: You'd need a physically imposing player who was also a specialist in aerial defending to claim you positively have his number, and those players are a) few and far between and b) clearly inferior to the likes of Chumpitaz in terms of their overall game.
If Ronaldo gets enough chances to score from a header, he will probably score from a header – but the question is whether he'd get enough clear-cut chances here to do so. The height of the CB pair isn't the most important part of that equation.
I am not getting the Tigana criticism for Enigma's team. Yes he was very good technically and could move forward but that does not mean he was not good enough to play as defensive midfielder. He was the DM in original "Carre Magique", carrying 3 number 10s in the team -
------------Platini---------------
----Genghini---------Giresse---
----------- Tigana--------------
Fernandez later replaced Genghini and Tigana became more free to play his B2B role, but he is certainly a good partner for Xavi here, esp given the lack of a dedicated number 10 in opposition team.
------------Platini---------------
----Genghini---------Giresse---
----------- Tigana--------------
Fernandez later replaced Genghini and Tigana became more free to play his B2B role, but he is certainly a good partner for Xavi here, esp given the lack of a dedicated number 10 in opposition team.
I'm not only going by height mate. Height is disadvantage unless you have a bigger jump to cover the difference. Some of the best headers as defenders(short ones Passarella) had incredible jump. In this case however you have Pele and Ronaldo in the box. Pele out jumped players much much taller than him and here he has a level field. Sure Chumpitaz and Cannavaro have excellent jump, but higher than Pele and Ronaldo?
Ronaldo can easily match both pair on jump and has 4 inches on Cannavaro who is higher.
Case in point:
I don't get the criticism either. Even Wenger often describes Tigana as a "defensive midfielder". It's not like he didn't play as an anchor and DM for Bordeaux either.
I seriously doesn't get what people tend to say with this phrase when Messi occupies the space that should be covered by defensive midfielder and not by the left back more often than not, even when he starts from the right. You do need a specialist there because if you don't have one, Messi will thrive on a less positionally disciplined alternative
It's an incredibly tenuous argument, though.
If his defenders are competent in the air at the highest level, it's not a factor. Does Ronaldo score multiple headers in every match he plays? The service your aerial attackers are likely to get is a much more relevant factor.
ETA:
It's a simple point: Do you plan on taking advantage of Ronaldo's and Pelé's aerial capabilities actively? Do you intend to base your game on that aspect? Firstly, it doesn't seem to be the case – and secondly, if it is the case, you don't have the ideal setup for it. You have good-to-competent crossers, not specialists – and it's by no means obvious that you'll be able to constantly get into positions from where you can target Pelé and Ronaldo in the box (with the intention of producing aerial chances).
In other words, it seems much more likely that their aerial prowess is something they may utilize if and when, not constantly – as some sort of primary tactic. And in that setting, what matters is that the opponent's CBs are up to scratch in the air – which they clearly are – not that they're monsters or specialists. Ronaldo won't automatically score the first time he finds himself in an aerial duel with Cannavaro – football doesn't work that way.
If his defenders are competent in the air at the highest level, it's not a factor. Does Ronaldo score multiple headers in every match he plays? The service your aerial attackers are likely to get is a much more relevant factor.
ETA:
It's a simple point: Do you plan on taking advantage of Ronaldo's and Pelé's aerial capabilities actively? Do you intend to base your game on that aspect? Firstly, it doesn't seem to be the case – and secondly, if it is the case, you don't have the ideal setup for it. You have good-to-competent crossers, not specialists – and it's by no means obvious that you'll be able to constantly get into positions from where you can target Pelé and Ronaldo in the box (with the intention of producing aerial chances).
In other words, it seems much more likely that their aerial prowess is something they may utilize if and when, not constantly – as some sort of primary tactic. And in that setting, what matters is that the opponent's CBs are up to scratch in the air – which they clearly are – not that they're monsters or specialists. Ronaldo won't automatically score the first time he finds himself in an aerial duel with Cannavaro – football doesn't work that way.
Last edited:
It's not just Ronaldo tho. It's Ronaldo and Pele. I don't see the reasoning behind not being a weapon. You can see Sergio Ramos saving Real numerous times through headers in big games, yet when having two of the best in that area - leap plus heading ability it's enough to have a pair of CB's competent on the highest level to be enough?
Ronaldo scores quite a few, here's interesting article on the mail about it:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/eu...-Ronaldo-best-header-ball-world-football.html
It's not just because harms CB is short, far from it. It's the combination of having Ronaldo and Pele there, matching their leap if not bettering it and being in Ronaldo's case taller.
I don't really see how it's a non factor. You are taking away 2 components of Pele and Ronaldo's game which are acknowledged as strengths due to the CB's are competent in the air.
I don't think I'm short on service and creativity as well. Surely Nedved can cross a ball better than Wes Brown
See above.
I'm not basing my game plan around crossing the ball from every position of course. But negating an advantage in the air when the ball is high in the box because the other pair is competent in the air is a bit ridiculous claim. Ronaldo scored some of the biggest goals in his career from a header's inside the box. Cannavaro and Chumpitaz won't automatically win every ball in the box just because the ball wasn't "bent like Beckham".
When the ball is in the box(not all the time of course) I don't see a reason why I shouldn't have advantage there, at least in an imaginary set up. I've not said Ronaldo will score hattrick of headers or something, but in a decisive game even one goal makes a difference.
Do Real always cross the ball? How come then Ronaldo scores a fair few amount of headers? Do they have the best crossers in the game and their game plan is based on that?
You're missing the point.
To what degree does what is an obvious weapon in your locker (nobody denies that) make a difference in this match? Will it get you a goal? Will it win you the match? Will it matter, all things said and done?
If I field a couple of midfielders who are great from range, will they actually score from range? Depends on the full match picture, doesn't it? Depends on how I set up - and how the opponent sets up. Depends on whether his keeper is great at stopping long rangers - or positively poor at it. Most likely, though, it will remain a potential weapon for me - but not a decisive factor.
To what degree does what is an obvious weapon in your locker (nobody denies that) make a difference in this match? Will it get you a goal? Will it win you the match? Will it matter, all things said and done?
If I field a couple of midfielders who are great from range, will they actually score from range? Depends on the full match picture, doesn't it? Depends on how I set up - and how the opponent sets up. Depends on whether his keeper is great at stopping long rangers - or positively poor at it. Most likely, though, it will remain a potential weapon for me - but not a decisive factor.
I'm not sure what is your point to be honest
I'm just pointing out that this is a weapon and harms pair of cb's are not suited to combat that area in the sense of negating it. Could a single header decide the game? Surely you'd agree that it can - Ronaldo himself proved that on more than one occasion.I just pointed out it's a potential match winner. The game might be decided by a single goal and having that advantage is worth pointing out. I'm not basing my entire strategy on it. I have plenty of other options - Ronaldo left in space on counter, Pele from the middle and inside the area. Nedved with a long ranger. Xavi to split up the defense and find Suarez on the shoulder of the last defender.
Either of those options are potential game changers.
I'm not sure what is your point to be honest
I stated very clearly above what my point is: Unless you have an obvious edge, there's no reason why the voters should put any special emphasis on this.
Your initial play was pretty obvious: His central defenders are midgets = advantage for me, because Ronaldo and Pelé are excellent in the air. Very well – but his defenders are actually very good in the air, in spite of being midgets, so there goes the obvious edge.
Ronaldo is dangerous in the air, could score from a header – sure, it would be absurd to deny this. It's not a particularly juicy argument, though – it's a potential goal scoring avenue for you, nothing more, nothing less. You don't have monster crossers in your team, and your general game isn't based on making the most out of Ronaldo's and Pelé's aerial capabilities – so, again, there is no obvious edge. You have your potential ways to grab a goal – he has his. Ronaldo scoring from a header isn't significantly more likely to happen than Van Basten doing the same from a Dzajic cross. *
* Pretty decent combo, come to think of it: Expert crosser and brilliant aerial finisher.
Last edited:
Erm, no, except it wasn't. I've explained couple of times that combination of all factors should be considered as an advantage - not only because harms cb pair are short.
In a tight affair what should count as an edge then? My initial point was after @Šjor Bepo brought the argument that harms CB pair is ideal to counter the danger, when they are clearly not in the air. I don't think Cannavaro is either covering for Cafu against Ronaldo as a side point. I've not banged on about it before that argument did I?
I've also explained why both Pele and Ronaldo are better in the air compared to harms CB's and why it can be an advantage. You don't have to have the best crossers in the game to gain an edge in that area. In this case it's not just Ronaldo as I've mentioned but also Pele. Sure I haven't based my game on that but why not emphasize on it? You too seem to think it's a weapon but in the same time shouldn't be mentioned as it's not an obvious edge? Ronaldo and Pele were not flanked by the best crossers in the game, far from it, yet they managed to amass quite few header goals and some really decisive, yet in the same time I have to have Beckham and Giggs on each flank to mention it as a weapon? Doesn't make any sense to me.
Also compared to the other way around Figueroa is reknown for his aerial game, but you say it's almost the same?
Ronaldo and Pele weren't facing defenders of the same caliber 99% of the time, so here goes your "average crossers" argument. More so, both my fullbacks have a big claim on being the best ever at their positions, so it's very hard even to make such a cross (unlike in most of the games where those two scored)
Cannavaro was also reknown for his aerial game btw, he wasn't just decent at it.
One of your full backs is actively involved in your attacking phase on the right side, so that leaves a gap, there. Having great full backs doesn't mean they will stop every cross in the box.
Ronaldo and Pele are better than Cannavaro in the air, you are fooling yourself if you think otherwise. Pele has scored in the 2 world cup finals with a header, Ronaldo has scored against United, Barcelona, Chelsea, Roma to name a few, and on international level as well.
Nilton Santos and Bergomi are equally good in the defensive phase as your full back pair, so there goes any chance of you exploiting the flanks then?
I fail to see how you can capitalize with a goal better in this game. The biggest concern so far has been Tigana in that defensive role - which is something I don't see how is valid at all and concentrating your attack on the left leaving Ronaldo completely exposed.
Did I say that?
What's the objective of your posts in this thread (or any match thread, for that matter)? To present sheer data which is either true or false, for people to look at and judge? Obviously not.
You're selling your team, as anyone would. What this aerial business amounts to, from your perspective, is a selling point. What I claim, as a retort, is that while it may be a positive – a weapon in your arsenal, as it were – it isn't a very good selling point.
That's not the same as saying that you shouldn't mention it – I never said that. It isn't a falsehood, it's just not a very good selling point – which is an obvious thing to bring up for someone who doesn't think it's a significant factor in the match.
Well, look at it chessboard style, then:
Dzajic (GOAT winger, expert crosser) to Van Basten (brilliant in the air and one of the best strikers in football history)
Vs.
Figueroa (brilliant in the air).
And:
Someone who isn't an expert crosser, certainly not compared to Dzajic (Santos? Nedved?) to Ronaldo (extremely good in the air, one of the best headers of the ball ever)
Vs.
Cannavaro (short-arse with a huge leap and generally excellent in the air)
Can you honestly claim there's a significant advantage here in your favour?
Again in a tight game, what do you account as decisive is purely personal judgement. I haven't build my team around it, but as you already agreed it's a valid point which I brought up in reply to Cannavaro and Chumpitaz being great in the role of coping with Ronaldo, Pele and Suarez. I pointed out that in the air Pele and Ronaldo have advantage. Whether it is significant and to what extend it's up for everyone to decide on his own. You might not consider it significant factor others might do. As you said it's not blank and white. In tight game even small advantages can decide a game.
It's not only in the air, I already mentioned that I don't see Cannavaro doing a good job covering Ronaldo for Cafu, on the contrary - Henry who is a fast agile and technical striker has given him a reall torrid time and Ronaldo is a level above. Harms needs Cafu in attack so the scenario Ronaldo on Cannavaro is bound to happen as well.
Again the advantage in the air is a bonus and another route to goal. It's up to the voters to decide if it is significant or not.
yeah let's do that.
Ronaldo - GOAT forward, brilliant in the air
Pele - GOAT forward probably best of all time - also brilliant in the air.
Cannavaro - short arse, huge leap, you'd probably agree not as huge as Ronaldo and Pele and generally excellent in the air.
Chumpitaz - short arse, huge leap worst in the air of the 4.
Figueroa - best defender in the air
Van Basten who is probably on level with the other two for the sake of argument
Maldini vs Santos - I'd say defensively they are about the same level, down to preference, Santos is highly rated and played like Maldini at CB for Botafogo
Bergomi vs Cafu - Bergomi is better defensively than Cafu
Nedved vs Dzajic - Dzajic is the better crosser, Nedved has more options in the box - Pele and Ronaldo, Dzajic - one Van Basten.
Overal what do we have - the best CB to neutralize the crossed ball - Figueroa. Ronaldo and Pele both dangerous in the box, only Van Basten for harms. Dzajic is better crosser, but Nedved is excellent as well having numerous assists throughout his illustrious career, however he can look for 2 options to cross in the box rather than one. Same for Santos on the left.
Again. Not to clog the thread any further everyone can decide for himself whether it is an advantage or not and to what extend.