The Doubles Draft - SF: Invictus/Theon vs Downcast

[Chesterlestreet]

Don't get you at all. I accept the argument of not being able to stretch play, but why is a defensive back 5 less defensive than a defensive back 4?

That's not the point. The question is how you exploit his qualities in the best possible way - and, for that matter, to what extent the role itself (that of a defensive wingback) makes much sense.

Would you play Bergomi as a wingback? Is there a line here, beyond which it becomes implausible to field a player whose main strengths are defensive in a wingback role? What is a wingback role, for that matter?

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Passarella is considered as one of the top 2 'greatest South-American" defenders because he used to score a lot... and not because he was the greatest stopper...

I advise you to drop this line of thought.

People may doubt his suitability to a formation/tactics/partnership...but nary a doubt on his skills, per se.

 

[Invictus]

I don't know.

Is Sammer a great sweeper? Yes
Is Sammer one of the greatest stoppers of All-Times? I'm not sure tbh

Let's talk about Passarella now

Passarella is considered as one of the top 2 'greatest South-American" defenders because he used to score a lot... and not because he was the greatest stopper...

I don't even know what's being discussed here anymore, truth be told. The game has descended from reasonable discussion to absolute anarchy. Why is Sammer being discussed as a stopper? And how is Passarella a near GOAT-caliber defender because he 'scored goals', not because he was a bloody good defender - one of the absolute best, and arguably the most stopper like out of the top echelon sweepers in a defensive sense given his vigorous style of play. Passarella was perfectly at home playing a role where he didn't advance that much. Ditto Baresi. Neither of them are going to abandon their assignment, and Passarella isn't going to seek out goal-scoring opportunities when he's being asked to play a defensive role, making the goal argument redundant, something that was touched upon in the OP itself.

There's a fairly simple reason for starting Passarella over Nesta. We think their pure defensive skills are fairly comparable, with Nesta being slightly taller, but Passarella has that extra bit of determination, cynicism, and bloody-minded mentality to thwart the central attack. That added competitive drive can be useful in matchups like this, especially when Passarella is being asked to stay back as a defender, and is not going to contribute to the offense with his 1 in 3 record.

If there's nothing meaningful to be discussed, let's take a breather instead of posting absurdity (claiming that Passarella was an all-time great because he scored goals being an extreme example of one).

 

[Ecstatic]

I was harsh about Passarella. Sorry.

See you tomorrow.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

That's not the point. The question is how you exploit his qualities in the best possible way - and, for that matter, to what extent the role itself (that of a defensive wingback) makes much sense.

Would you play Bergomi as a wingback? Is there a line here, beyond which it becomes implausible to field a player whose main strengths are defensive in a wingback role? What is a wingback role, for that matter?

I look at this in context this game and not as an isolated position discussion.

One, It has been noted before that his front 3 is stellar even without support from wings. So Vogts attacking contribution or lack of thereof as a wingback has minimal impact.

Two, Theon's points above on Best's receiving pass behind Vogts or Facchetti's running into space will both be minimal as being a defensive player there would not be much space behind him to exploit with a pass or run into, which mitigates a big threat from opponent.

yes, I agree this is not a traditional wing back scenario...but it fits with what he aims to do quite well.

 

[harms]

My answer is sample. We consider the peak performances.

Thuram scored 2 goals against Croatia at the WC 1998.

Thuram is not Cafu but won't be a ridiculous option.

His peak lasted what, 90 minutes?

Don't think that it's fair comparing Thuram to Vogts offensively though, the latter was clearly on another level

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Nice match so far. Brilliant from both managers.

 

[Raees]

Random thoughts.. Pisses me off when people make out like Vogts is some sort of donkey on the ball who is basically a legendary defender.

In the modern game he'd be more than good enough going forwards.. I have shown footage of his dribbling and passing skills. He is a very well balanced player and would not be a hindrance going forward.

He's not Cafu but he would provide sufficient overlap play and be dangerous if given room. He can carry the ball very well.

Secondly Passarella... Surely the goals are just a bonus where he is concerned. You don't get the reputation he does by being some sort of prototype David Luiz.. He is a legendary defender who is as complete as they come and pretty sure he is rated higher than Nesta on that basis alone even without the goals.

 

[Gio]

Fascinating match. Invictus and Theon's defence is extremely strong. I'm not that taken with Passarella wedged inbetween Facchetti and Baresi, Nesta is the cleaner fit there even if it means dredging up the 1998 UEFA cup final demolition job. Downcast's defence is tactically slicker - Kohler imperious in winning the WC there in 1990, Bergomi a natural RCB, Scirea dropping between with Monti to cover any forays forward. It's very complementary. Vogts not a typical wing back but it's a fair concession and a pragmatic choice given the calibre he's up against. He's much under-rated as a footballer though and his average ratings for Monchengladbach in the 70s were higher than anyone IIRC. Both attacks are gorgeous and I cannot find fault in either of them.

 

[Enigma_87]

Passarella - Baresi combo is a bit of a turnoff for me. Not that I don't rate high both of them individually or that they have weaknesses - both legendary defenders, but as a pair...I just don't see it working well enough. Doesn't sit right.

Any particular reason @Invictus to choose that pair and bench Nesta, apart from Passarella being rated highly? To me Nesta with either of them is a much better match, despite being not in the same breath when it comes to overall status? Probably answered in the thread but with all the quotes and 10000 posts is kinda mess to go through it all.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

I look at this in context this game and not as an isolated position discussion.

One, It has been noted before that his front 3 is stellar even without support from wings. So Vogts attacking contribution or lack of thereof as a wingback has minimal impact.

Two, Theon's points above on Best's receiving pass behind Vogts or Facchetti's running into space will both be minimal as being a defensive player there would not be much space behind him to exploit with a pass or run into, which mitigates a big threat from opponent.

yes, I agree this is not a traditional wing back scenario...but it fits with what he aims to do quite well.

Well - yes. It does make some sense, I've never denied that. My problem with it is where it makes sense, so to speak: Regarded in "battle" mode (X's flank versus Y's defence) it seems logical enough. But that disregards the full picture - almost completely. To me the choice of formation, the basic roles you assign to players, should make some sense too - it should be "organic", if you will. It should work, on the whole - not just as a measure to deal with a particular "battle" scenario.

This is a possible take on his actual setup:

Spoiler: Illustration

In that interpretation, there's only one WB - and the whole thing looks both overly defensive and overly narrow.

 

[harms]

Any particular reason @Invictus to choose that pair and bench Nesta, apart from Passarella being rated highly? To me Nesta with either of them is a much better match, despite being not in the same breath when it comes to overall status? Probably answered in the thread but with all the quotes and 10000 posts is kinda mess to go through it all.

There's a fairly simple reason for starting Passarella over Nesta. We think their pure defensive skills are fairly comparable, with Nesta being slightly taller, but Passarella has that extra bit of determination, cynicism, and bloody-minded mentality to thwart the central attack. That added competitive drive can be useful in matchups like this, especially when Passarella is being asked to stay back as a defender, and is not going to contribute to the offense with his 1 in 3 record.

Plus I think it's fair to assume that the perspective of history between Nesta and Ronaldo (1998 UEFA Cup final) influencing the voters was one of the main reasons behind the choice.

 

[Theon]

Come on, in a back 5 with 2 defensive fullbacks there I assumed Facchetti's overlapping run influence would be very limited in this setup. Your point on Best is valid. A player of Best's quality would find a way through, but he still has to dribble past Bergomi and avoid a sweeping Scirea to score

I don't agree and I think that central square of Baresi/Passarella/Redondo/Varela would be much harder to play through but you have them scoring at least a goal.

GIACINTO FACCHETTI

The greatest attacking fullback of all time and the prototype of a player capable of dominating a flank on his own.

Such was Facchetti's ability that the Catenaccio tactics of La Grande Inter were largely built around his influence and ability offensively - he didn't need a winger playing in front of him due to how effective he was going forward.

I just can't accept that Facchetti is somehow neutered because Vogts is playing right wingback as his proven status in the game is unquestionable in this role, with 634 games and 75 goals as Captain of Inter Milan, four scuddeti, two European Cups and World Cup finalist as the Captain of Italy.

Facchetti is more than capable of causing problems for Vogts on his own and that's without factoring in the interplay with George Best - he was voted second in the Ballon d'Or (highest finish ever by a fullback) largely on the basis of his attacking influence, dribbling and technical abilities.

 

[Tuppet]

Is Invictus/Theon attack the best attack assembled in fantasy drafts ? if not its pretty close. The only thing stopping me to vote for them is their defensive line up.

Passarella is one of the best defenders of all time but there is something off about Passarella - Baresi partnership and could have been remedied easily by playing Nesta who is at least equal if not better pure defender. To start with both Passarella & Baresi are used to play with more rugged stoppers, Ruggeri/Perfumo for Passarella and Costacurta for Baresi. Also Passarella is known for his raids infield and his playmaking/goal-scoring is definitely part of his legend. Asking him to stay back does not give you full Passarella package, Its like saying Roberto Carlos to stay back, he can do it but that just doesn't sit right with me. You can't just take away attacking from a defender who scored 140 goals (and 22 international goals !!). And then him being along side Facchetti who was like a striker playing on left wing back role, I am totally unconvinced by that defensive line up.

 

[Enigma_87]

Plus I think it's fair to assume that the perspective of history between Nesta and Ronaldo (1998 UEFA Cup final) influencing the voters was one of the main reasons behind the choice.

Nesta's peak was around 2001, which should be the base of comparison, besides Ronaldo can be equally devastating regardless of whether he's up against Passarella or Nesta, both one of the best central defenders, mind.

Yet looking at the possible pairs, Baresi/Nesta or even Passarella/Nesta look like a much better match. Obviously Passarella is better defender overall than Nesta, but in the areas he excels - organization, leadership and of course - scoring is something either Baresi covers or in terms of scoring - in this set up he's not required to do so, which takes away part of his game. To me it's a bit of a shoehorned defence with the best possible players, rather than the best possible match in terms of individuality and style.

 

[Moby]

that central square of Baresi/Passarella/Redondo/Varela would be much harder to play through

No doubt about the CB pair but you might be overrating that midfield a bit. They are against Maradona supported by an all action Matthaus, which can easily be the midfield of the greatest all time XI while both Redondo and Varela (and it's weird coming from me) particularly defensively with the ball at Maradona's feet would struggle in stopping them. Especially against that pace and penetration.

 

[Invictus]

Any particular reason @Invictus to choose that pair and bench Nesta, apart from Passarella being rated highly? To me Nesta with either of them is a much better match, despite being not in the same breath when it comes to overall status? Probably answered in the thread but with all the quotes and 10000 posts is kinda mess to go through it all.

The biggest reason for putting Passarella there was to avoid tedious Nesta-Parma-Ronaldo discussions that will inevitably find their way into the thread. Infact, you know what, I stand corrected, it's there in the opposition OP as a point of emphasis (based on a sample size of 1 game - which could happen to anyone).

Plus I think it's fair to assume that the perspective of history between Nesta and Ronaldo (1998 UEFA Cup final) influencing the voters was one of the main reasons behind the choice.

Yep, that narrative is easy to sell, even though Nesta hadn't quite reached his peak as a pure defender in 1998:

Serie A Defender of the Year (4): 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Plus I think it's fair to assume that the perspective of history between Nesta and Ronaldo (1998 UEFA Cup final) influencing the voters was one of the main reasons behind the choice.

Probably was.

Battle mode again - Ronaldo versus Nesta regarded in complete isolation, which is obviously absurd enough.

Grandoni - Nesta - Negro - Favalli

Venturin - Jugović​

versus

Brehme - Baresi - Nesta - Facchetti

Varela - Redondo​

 

[harms]

Facchetti is more than capable of causing problems for Vogts on his own and that's without factoring in the interplay with George Best - he was voted second in the Ballon d'Or (highest finish ever by a fullback) largely on the basis of his attacking influence, dribbling and technical abilities.

They have a history between them and I think it's fair to say that Vogts came out as a winner, considering that the can of Coca-Cola robbed Borussia of 7 goals and a place in the quarters

It was a strange game though, one of the strangest ever tbf

 

[Enigma_87]

Is Invictus/Theon attack the best attack assembled in fantasy drafts ? if not its pretty close. The only thing stopping me to vote for them is their defensive line up.

Passarella is one of the best defenders of all time but there is something off about Passarella - Baresi partnership and could have been remedied easily by playing Nesta who is at least equal if not better pure defender. To start with both Passarella & Baresi are used to play with more rugged stoppers, Ruggeri/Perfumo for Passarella and Costacurta for Baresi. Also Passarella is known for his raids infield and his playmaking/goal-scoring is definitely part of his legend. Asking him to stay back does not give you full Passarella package, Its like saying Roberto Carlos to stay back, he can do it but that just doesn't sit right with me. You can't just take away attacking from a defender who scored 140 goals (and 22 international goals !!). And then him being along side Facchetti who was like a striker playing on left wing back role, I am totally unconvinced by that defensive line up.

Exactly. This for me is the key for this match up. In attack and midfield Invictus/Theon is one of the best teams I've see in these drafts.

And Downcast defense as of now is much better suited in terms of style.

 

[Deleted member 101472]

A passarella baresi centre back pairing being scrutinized on a forum where smalling and blind were heralded as world beaters at one point...you couldn't make it up.

 

[Theon]

No doubt about the CB pair but you might be overrating that midfield a bit. They are against Maradona supported by an all action Matthaus, which can easily be the midfield of the greatest all time XI while both Redondo and Varela (and it's weird coming from me) particularly defensively with the ball at Maradona's feet would struggle in stopping them. Especially against that pace and penetration.

I agree with you in terms of the respective qualities/abilities of those players but that wasn't the main point I was trying to make - the main point I was hitting at is that Baresi/Passarella/Varela/Redondo (and Facchetti for that matter) would all be tucked in closer together as there is a lack of width stretching the defence.

In my view that's much easier to defend against, whereas Bergomi and Kohler are going to be dragged in all sorts of postions by Facchetti/Best and Brehme/Garrincha, which creates gaps centrally for Pele.

 

[Theon]

Is Invictus/Theon attack the best attack assembled in fantasy drafts ? if not its pretty close. The only thing stopping me to vote for them is their defensive line up.

Passarella is one of the best defenders of all time but there is something off about Passarella - Baresi partnership and could have been remedied easily by playing Nesta who is at least equal if not better pure defender. To start with both Passarella & Baresi are used to play with more rugged stoppers, Ruggeri/Perfumo for Passarella and Costacurta for Baresi. Also Passarella is known for his raids infield and his playmaking/goal-scoring is definitely part of his legend. Asking him to stay back does not give you full Passarella package, Its like saying Roberto Carlos to stay back, he can do it but that just doesn't sit right with me. You can't just take away attacking from a defender who scored 140 goals (and 22 international goals !!). And then him being along side Facchetti who was like a striker playing on left wing back role, I am totally unconvinced by that defensive line up.

It's a fair point - Passarella's goals were generally headers or freekicks though.

And in terms of his peak performance that would be the '78 World Cup and his central defensive partner was a chap called Galvan who was horrific in a number of games I watched. Passarella played an extremely disciplined role defensively - there was no walkabouts or real breaks forward, it was the type of performance that Baresi or Figueroa would have put in on the ball (accurate passing, building attacks from the back and occasionally moving forward slightly).

 

[harms]

Nesta's peak was around 2001, which should be the base of comparison, besides Ronaldo can be equally devastating regardless of whether he's up against Passarella or Nesta, both one of the best central defenders, mind.

Yet looking at the possible pairs, Baresi/Nesta or even Passarella/Nesta look like a much better match. Obviously Passarella is better defender overall than Nesta, but in the areas he excels - organization, leadership and of course - scoring is something either Baresi covers or in terms of scoring - in this set up he's not required to do so, which takes away part of his game. To me it's a bit of a shoehorned defence with the best possible players, rather than the best possible match in terms of individuality and style.

I'm not disagreeing with you - in fact I was one of the first to question that decision, Nesta and Baresi looks absolutely perfect, unlike Baresi and Passarella - I was just trying to understand the reasoning behind the swap.

 

[Enigma_87]

The biggest reason for putting Passarella there was to avoid tedious Nesta-Parma-Ronaldo discussions that will inevitably find their way into the thread. Infact, you know what, I stand corrected, it's there in the opposition OP as a point of emphasis (based on a sample size of 1 game - which could happen to anyone).

Yep, that narrative is easy to sell, even though Nesta hadn't quite reached his peak as a pure defender in 1998:

Serie A Defender of the Year (4): 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003

Sure, I can understand that reasoning and it can be brought up but for me one off game is just what it is. One off game. It's the same as not fielding Dasayev against Van Basten due to THAT goal, or Vidic against Torres. It's a bit of a moot point when you have different set ups. Nesta was young player of the year in Seria A that year I think? He was good 3-4 years away from reaching his peak, while Ronaldo was pretty much at his. Besides that Lazio set up is pretty irrelevant to having Baresi as a partner and Varela/Redondo sitting in front.

Besides as others have mentioned I don't think there is much between Nesta and Passarella in purely defensive sense, which is needed to your set up.

 

[Enigma_87]

I'm not disagreeing with you - in fact I was one of the first to question that decision, Nesta and Baresi looks absolutely perfect, unlike Baresi and Passarella - I was just trying to understand the reasoning behind the swap.

To be fair having Varela/Redondo sitting in front of the defence makes it even worse.

Passarella is played in a restricted role, which takes away the biggest advantage he has on Nesta, who would be in his natural role to compliment probably the best sweeper/CB of all time in Baresi.

 

[Šjor Bepo]

Is Invictus/Theon attack the best attack assembled in fantasy drafts ?

Since i follow drafts i think it is, a perfect blend of balance and individual quality. Usually its just the latter one....
They have 2 GOAT players that have a strong case if being the best ever and both of them have a doze of selflessness that makes em even greater - Di Stefano and Pele.
Both Best and Di Stefano excelled in this setup, Di Stefano in Real where he played with classic winger(Gento/Garrincha) and a player that likes to cut inside(Kopa/Best) and i can see him having a fantastic partnership with Pele.
Best in United where he had a classic winger(Aston/Garrincha) on one side, Charlton at number 10 who is pretty much a lesser version of Di Stefano and Law who's role and movement would be pretty close to Pele in this setup. Garrincha has his bff up front and the rest are pretty irrelevant for him and there is Pele who is pretty much the ultimate GOAT in terms of pairing up with other goats(out of 2 that are close to him or on his level we have one on the pitch in Di Stefano and the third who is waiting foir his opponent in the final - Messi).

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Random thoughts.. Pisses me off when people make out like Vogts is some sort of donkey on the ball who is basically a legendary defender.

Well, I can't speak for anyone else but for me that is not what this is about at all.

This is as good as it gets - top level stuff, practically nothing but GOATs all over the place.

Vogts is deployed as a wingback in a...well, in a formation with wingbacks. That's the starting point.

Whether he's a balanced full back or not (which he clearly is to a greater extent than he is sometimes given credit for, as I've already mentioned) is beside the point.

You see a formation with wingbacks in an all-time, last round (in practice that is what this is) match - and you expect those wingbacks to be experts. Again - that's the starting point. Then you can look at the particular strategy and determine whether the thing actually makes sense.

To me it only does so partially - and I don't see it as being either the most effective, nor the most obvious (clearly not) use of the player in question.

 

[harms]

Is Invictus/Theon attack the best attack assembled in fantasy drafts ? if not its pretty close

Cal's C. Ronaldo, Pele and Messi front three was pretty good, I like them better, probably.

 

[Raees]

Well, I can't speak for anyone else but for me that is not what this is about at all.

This is as good as it gets - top level stuff, practically nothing but GOATs all over the place.

Vogts is deployed as a wingback in a...well, in a formation with wingbacks. That's the starting point.

Whether he's a balanced full back or not (which he clearly is to a greater extent than he is sometimes given credit for, as I've already mentioned) is beside the point.

You see a formation with wingbacks in an all-time, last round (in practice that is what this is) match - and you expect those wingbacks to be experts. Again - that's the starting point. Then you can look at the particular strategy and determine whether the thing actually makes sense.

To me it only does so partially - and I don't see it as being either the most effective, nor the most obvious (clearly not) use of the player in question.

Yeah that is fair enough, just saying he could make a fist of it.. but I agree that having him and Bergomi there, seems to be overkill.

 

[harms]

So many similarities No wonder @Tuppet loves @Invictus attack
Joga/Gio vs Tuppet

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Is Invictus/Theon attack the best attack assembled in fantasy drafts ?

If they do make it to finals, then we'd have...

George Best...Pele...Garrincha
vs
Cristiano...van Basten...Messi

Muppet heaven

 

[Moby]

If they do make it to finals, then we'd have...

George Best...Pele...Garrincha
vs
Cristiano...van Basten...Messi

Muppet heaven

Machines against mortals. Machines will win.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

and the whole thing looks both overly defensive and overly narrow.

It sure is overly defensive and narrow...but I just don't think being that way is a disadvantage in this case, for reasons above.

 

[Moby]

@Chesterlestreet I don't think Vogts as a RCB in a back 5 would make much sense either. He's not THAT defensive, and usually players in that role have played as a CB in some capacity over the years. e.g. Bergomi, Thuram, Gentile, Burgnich, Ferrara, etc. Vogts is a proper fullback who when not on man marking duties would be best used in a flat back 4 with more than decent - even if not as per the requirements of a flamboyant wing-back - offensive skills. Bit of a Dennis Irwin-esque presence if you will. RCB is still supposed to be primarily a CB who is comfortable out wide, a defense minded fullback isnt the ideal fit there. In the link harms posted Gio/Joga have Eric Gerets as the wing-back, I don't believe based on overall careers there's much between the offensive qualities of Vogts and Gerets, and while it usually makes sense to have someone with clearly outlined offensive qualities like Cafu or Manuel Amoros for example, in a game with such attacking calibre being pragmatic and having one attacking wingback with the other not-so-attacking one wouldn't hurt as Gio summarised in his post. It is odd to see Vogts in this role at the first sight for sure, but once you see there is Cabrini who is a naturally attacking wingback on the other side and this flank is facing a combo of Facchetti and George Best, you perhaps to start to see a bit more sense in the move. Certainly not something we havent seen in top level games in our lifetimes - managers opting for extra insurance against a particular set of players. Real Madrid, e.g. often played Pepe as a defensive midfield against Barca to counter Messi specifically, not that it worked of course, but there is a similar rationale there. Pragmatism, basically. Agree with it here or not is another issue but at least we can see where the bloke is coming for, I think.

 

[Invictus]

No doubt about the CB pair but you might be overrating that midfield a bit. They are against Maradona supported by an all action Matthaus, which can easily be the midfield of the greatest all time XI while both Redondo and Varela (and it's weird coming from me) particularly defensively with the ball at Maradona's feet would struggle in stopping them. Especially against that pace and penetration.

I think it's an apples to oranges comparison here, Aldo. Against a narrow offense, the emphasis shouldn't be on all-action performances, but proper positioning to stifle the central areas - which is something these midfielders excelled at. And in the overall assessment of the respective midfield trios - one man is getting severely underrated - and that's Di Stéfano. If Varela will struggle to contain Maradona, I think it's only fair that we extend the same rationale in Di Stéfano's favor vs Monti, because while Monti marked Sindelaar in a game marred by controversy in Italy's favor, Varela produced a dominating performance too, choking the life out of the opposition - except this was against the swashbuckling Zizinho and co. (who had scored 13 goals in the QF and SF combined) in front of 200,000 people at the Maracanã. He's up there after Rijkaard for the best defensive midfielders in the draft pool.

Di Stéfano constantly gets underrated in these threads, too, and it's a travesty given his standing in the game that his all-action style isn't considered in proper light, while Maradona's skill is lauded. There needs to be some middle ground in there, because the core of Maradona-Puskás-Scirea didn't magically fall into our laps in the DoF. Infact, none of the current starting XI are from the DoF allocation, and the best of the best in terms of reinforcement - Di Stéfano, isn't getting adequate acclaim.

Argh, feck it, pre-peak UEFA Cup Final be damned.

@Edgar Allan Pillow, sub time:

Peak years:

Serie A Defender of the Year (4): 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003
UEFA Team of the Year (4): 2002, 2003, 2004, 2007

 

[harms]

- Where is my armband, @Invictus?

Good sub.

 

[Invictus]

So many similarities No wonder @Tuppet loves @Invictus attack
Joga/Gio vs Tuppet

Heh, as soon as Maradona-Puskás-Scirea were allocated in DoF, everyone knew what the ultimate plan was.

Prepare your Messi-Van Basten-Ronaldo trio, too, mate: https://www.redcafe.net/threads/billy-no-mates-draft-sf-joga-gio-vs-invictus-theon.415064/



EDIT: lool, + Figueroa + Cannavaro.

 

[harms]

Heh, as soon as Maradona-Puskás-Scirea were allocated in DoF, everyone knew what the ultimate plan was.

Prepare your Messi-Van Basten-Ronaldo trio, too, mate: https://www.redcafe.net/threads/billy-no-mates-draft-sf-joga-gio-vs-invictus-theon.415064/

Wtf, Cristiano - Van Basten - Messi and Cannavaro - Figueroa! That's 5/11 players and all in the crucial roles too

 

[Chesterlestreet]

@Chesterlestreet I don't think Vogts as a RCB in a back 5 would make much sense either. He's not THAT defensive, and usually players in that role have played as a CB in some capacity over the years. e.g. Bergomi, Thuram, Gentile, Burgnich, Ferrara, etc.

As a matter of fact I think Vogts did play CB on occasion (could be wrong, though) - but that's a moot enough point, as I never said anything about him as an RCB in a back 5: I was talking about an Italian style back four with a hybrid RB/RCB player (someone in the Burgnich mould, if you will).

The most obvious move would be to simply play him as a straight RB, though. One that is extremely good defensively.

Or you can just come out and say - for instance - that his role is that of a man marker, dedicated to shadowing Best. An extra defender with a special brief - as you say. Sure, no problem with that. He isn't presented as such, though - he is, supposedly, playing as a wingback, in a formation which normally relies on the player in his position being...a wingback.

As said above, the counter argument to "he ain't a wingback" seems to be "well, no - but he doesn't have to be, not really". Which is debatable, for several reasons - for me.