........................................ TEAM CHESTER .........................................vs.................................... TEAM HARMS ..................................
Team Chesterlestreet
COMMENTS:
I've gone back to the original approach here – the one I had in mind at the beginning, when I decided to build a team that is rock solid defensively, tactically astute, filled with hard workers and team players, and capable of quick transitions which are likely to lead to goal scoring opportunities. I didn't have a wingback setup in mind, explicitly, but pretty soon I concluded that this basic model (a variation on the 3-5-2 or 5-3-2, a classic formation used by several great and highly successful managers over the years) makes the most sense – at least as the default one. I believe I have upgraded the team from the first round match considerably – and I believe the upgrades are logical, i.e. they haven't been picked simply because they're better individually and/or greater names, but because they can plausibly do precisely what I ask of them here – while playing on the top of their game. The way I see it, the 3-5-2/5-3-2 is a basic model which allows for much improvisation: The configuration you go for beyond the basic 3+2 defensive part can be practically anything within reason: I have gone for a 2-1-2 of sorts, with a DM (Rijkaard), an allrounder CM (Falcão), a mainly offensive midfielder (Charlton), a second striker whose role is the freest in the team (Cruyff) and a centre forward (Müller).
The roles here should be clear-cut with one possible exception, so I will keep this brief. The central defensive trio reprise their roles from the first match. The difference is that they're now playing ahead of arguably the greatest goal keeper in football history. The wingback roles are self-explanatory. I consider Lizarazu an upgrade on Briegel since he is more of a specialist (with the German being more of an allrounder).
The midfield combo is pretty straight-forward and the roles have been described above. Specific comment: Moore will carry the ball forward to look for passing alternatives to some degree (he will do so when it's opportune, simply put – it's part of his natural game, after all) and part of Rijkaard's brief is to cover for him when he ventures forward: Standard stuff.
The two “strikers” in this setup are very different. Müller's game should be familiar to most – but like I did in the last match, I will point out that he is far from being a stationary box player. Cruyff's role is what it all comes down to, I suppose, in terms of buying the team at this stage of the draft: It's a free role, simply put. He isn't a “partner” to Müller in the normal sense. He will roam around freely – and he will be the team's main orchestrator. The arrows indicate this free roaming aspect (imperfectly – I wish SMT had more arrow options). This too, as I see it, is logical. It sounds a bit too easy to simply slap that "free role" label on a player - and then expect him to do maximum damage without further instruction. But Cruyff's natural game is entirely in line with the role - I'm not expecting him to do anything he didn't normally do, nor to influence the match in a way which is not realistic. Whether one thinks that influence will tip the scales - as I'm inclined to myself - or not, is up for debate. But that he is better suited than most to playing just such a "free role" (knowing where to involve himself, in what exact capacity, without sticking to a script) shouldn't be a controversial claim.
Key points: Three top-of-the-line central defenders whose main function is obviously to fight it out with my opponent's extremely dangerous attackers. A tactically astute and defensively sound CM who is instructed to keep his game “balanced”. A specialist DM who can be called, without exaggerating, the greatest ever in his position. A pair of WBs who are good enough offensively to make the attack a five-man unit. Three GOATs as the chief attackers, with a free-roaming Cruyff commanding the troops.
That's it. Will it be enough? In terms of winning the vote? Who knows, but I'm sure this team would prove a handful for any opponent – and that's enough for me.
Yeah, just felt that for this specific match, given Charlton...was wondering if it'd be better if he was better right.
