He didn't impress me in the final but you should't compare modern TotT with the older ones. They usually mean something.
The Euro Draft - QF - Team EAP vs Raees
- Thread starter Balu
- Start date
In fairness Durkovic overlapped well at times. But I'm pretty sure Soviet Union's winning goal in the final came from his side, as did one or two of France's goals in the semi from my recollection.
Problem though is how he will fare against the electric Henry. That's the biggest mismatch on the park.
didnt someone said that before they didnt have TotT? If that was the case there is a big possibility the same people "voted" for modern and old TotT....
Seeing as Henry did what he did to Nesta and Cannavaro.. interested to see how EAP is looking to limit his threat?
Facchetti + Henry! Feck me what a combo, and we are talking about a beast mode Henry who tortured Nesta and Cannavaro....
Tbh, it was not and it was questioned last match too. It really would be totally wrong if you think voters rolled over and voted for me just because I questioned Rijkaard!
Greatest defense ever assembled in drafting history? That's a bit hyperbolic
Yeah, they didn't. But they are not picked because of the media hype - like Luiz is, for example. More so, retrospective peaks make more sense and are more objective because there is no need to please the public
Seriously?
To be fair to him our defence is arguably one of the best compiled in drafting history.. it was arguable and as I pointed out, in comparison to @antohans, all time draft final team... it doesn't look too shabby in comparison. Kohler in for Ferdinand, Beckenbauer in for Figueroa.. it is hardly hyperbolic, just like Puskas/Gullit are arguably two of the best inside forward duo you could find too.
fair point, but i still cant see how is he in the team. They conceded 6 goals in 2 games, when you see they only picked 2 defenders i dont understand how they didnt pick anybody from Soviet Union....
Getting flack for playing Rijkaard in the same role as he did in Euro 92 to the extent that we are accused of taking the piss out of the spirit of the draft?Seriously?
Let me address some points in Henry. See berba's comments quoted below too.
Henry had a excellent Euro, but if you argue purely by Euro peaks, Kluivert's was better with a Golden Boot to top it. Puskas had a brilliant CEIC-5 top scoring 10 goals. I really think Henry is the 3rd best striker and Zlatan possible sharing 4th with Gullit on the pitch here.
On his role:
- Henry was awesome in 2000 because he played off Duggary. Here he is the primary goal scorer. Here he as Zlatan who will not be complimentary at all. Zlatan would go for glory himself and not work in tandem with Henry.
- Imo, both Henry and Zlatan are better off with a selfless striker in front of them. Both drift all over the place and without a target man, they would be far less effective..more so with each other.
- Henry had the brilliance of Ziadane working for him too. Luis Suarez here playing a younger AM version of himslef and not the imperious Le Grande Inter version. He is extremely creative from the middle, but still lacks the attacking threat Zidane had in 2000.
Agree with berba totally. This is not a complementary partnership that would get the best out of both.
@MJJ @coolredwine We've made our view on Rijkaard clear. Let's not take it further.
1. It's not baseless when there are facts to prove it.
2. You can have any number of youtube videos showing Rijkaard passing from a central position, but that doesn't really change anything. There is still a legitimate question over his Euro position.
Ibrahimovic played alongside Henrik Larsson as a duo - it brought out the best out of him, so he isn't as selfish as you make out in fact some would say he works better in a 2.. as long as it isn't an oaf like Edinson Cavani.
Henry drifts left, Ibra is our Davide Trezeguet.. the focal point of our attack.
Henry > Kluivert in that form, he brings so much more to the game than just goals he is a match winner and the type of player who can dictate the flow of a game in that sort of form. It is absolute Beast mode.. Kluivert is not the second best forward on the pitch for that very reason, he could not tear a defence of the quality Henry did in that form.
Luis Suarez went to Inter in 1961 and he won Euro 1964 well into his Le Grande Inter career. At his absolute peak here as a player so that point is utter bull.
Henry drifts left, Ibra is our Davide Trezeguet.. the focal point of our attack.
Henry > Kluivert in that form, he brings so much more to the game than just goals he is a match winner and the type of player who can dictate the flow of a game in that sort of form. It is absolute Beast mode.. Kluivert is not the second best forward on the pitch for that very reason, he could not tear a defence of the quality Henry did in that form.
Luis Suarez went to Inter in 1961 and he won Euro 1964 well into his Le Grande Inter career. At his absolute peak here as a player so that point is utter bull.
What?
There is no argument about your strikeforce being superior - but there is one about your defence being ill-suited to face Henry from that side. I don't like Henry/Ibra pairing though, I would've traded Ibra for someone different for sure, but I find it very difficult to fit Ibra anywhere, I tried it once myself and failed miserably.
Not sure if Inter Suarez is better than the more attacking one, you state it as a fact when it's at least debatable.
Not sure if Inter Suarez is better than the more attacking one, you state it as a fact when it's at least debatable.
Different players, different positions. If anything, the comparison should be between Puskas and Henry and Puskas wins it with his eyes closed.
He isn't talking about the timeline, he is talking about his role on the pitch - and it was certainly more CM/AM-ish than DLP. But I don't see how this is a bad thing suddenly, which he implies.
He was 27/28, ripe age for a playmaker and he won Euro 1964, and back to back european cups in 1964/1965... he couldn't be playing much better to be fair. Its not like his legs had gone and he was only playing as a DLP at this point.. see the Spain formation below.
@Edgar Allan Pillow "- Henry was awesome in 2000 because he played off Duggary. Here he is the primary goal scorer. Here he as Zlatan who will not be complimentary at all. Zlatan would go for glory himself and not work in tandem with Henry.
- Imo, both Henry and Zlatan are better off with a selfless striker in front of them. Both drift all over the place and without a target man, they would be far less effective..more so with each other.
- Henry had the brilliance of Ziadane working for him too. Luis Suarez here playing a younger AM version of himslef and not the imperious Le Grande Inter version. He is extremely creative from the middle, but still lacks the attacking threat Zidane had in 2000."
Why wouldn't they be complimentary? Both of them are terrific goal scorers and perfectly suits the role tactically of occasionally finding space out wide. Ibrahimovic needs a good runner with him and Henry is great in that regard. Ibrahimovic directly provided a goal per game for Sweden being partnered with Rosenberg, Elmander and Toivonen.
Henry is miles better in every regard and Sweden's main problem is always that the other strikers are terrible goalscorers and Ibrahimovic is a great playmaker on top of being a goalscorer. Henry won't miss the chances that Ibrahimovic serves him on a plate and they'll work great together. Ibrahimovic will be perfect to link up with Henry and set him free with a through-ball or one one touch play and Henry will provide the movement and especially dribbling that Ibrahimovic needs around him.
- Imo, both Henry and Zlatan are better off with a selfless striker in front of them. Both drift all over the place and without a target man, they would be far less effective..more so with each other.
- Henry had the brilliance of Ziadane working for him too. Luis Suarez here playing a younger AM version of himslef and not the imperious Le Grande Inter version. He is extremely creative from the middle, but still lacks the attacking threat Zidane had in 2000."
Why wouldn't they be complimentary? Both of them are terrific goal scorers and perfectly suits the role tactically of occasionally finding space out wide. Ibrahimovic needs a good runner with him and Henry is great in that regard. Ibrahimovic directly provided a goal per game for Sweden being partnered with Rosenberg, Elmander and Toivonen.
Henry is miles better in every regard and Sweden's main problem is always that the other strikers are terrible goalscorers and Ibrahimovic is a great playmaker on top of being a goalscorer. Henry won't miss the chances that Ibrahimovic serves him on a plate and they'll work great together. Ibrahimovic will be perfect to link up with Henry and set him free with a through-ball or one one touch play and Henry will provide the movement and especially dribbling that Ibrahimovic needs around him.
Where are these facts?
One point about amoros, before I address other points.
As a 22 year old, he only played two games in euro 84. A red card in the opening game and a sub appearances in the final.
As a 30 year old, he played all three games for france in euro 92. A defeat to denmark, a scored draw against sweden and a nil nil with england. Not the imperious form everyone is used to. I dont think he can be considered anything other than an average fullback based on his euro performances.
As a 22 year old, he only played two games in euro 84. A red card in the opening game and a sub appearances in the final.
As a 30 year old, he played all three games for france in euro 92. A defeat to denmark, a scored draw against sweden and a nil nil with england. Not the imperious form everyone is used to. I dont think he can be considered anything other than an average fullback based on his euro performances.
Inter Suarez = DLP Suarez in my sentence, which he wasn't at Euro's. I'm defending him here
I already explained what I think EAP meant earlier - maybe I'm wrong in my interpretations though, who knowsErrr, chaps, I'm not one to usually make an issue of this but do we have five managers arguing?
I agree that Henry is likely to have a great game and that is not a good thing for EAP.
Not really, as zebec/kohler both have man-marking roles for gullit/puskas. SInce those two will be playing deeper than kluivert it naturally means that team raees/gio will have to play one of becken./rijkaard as a sweeper. Which would negate their influence a bit. Given the lackluster performance of both zebec and amoros in european competition I dont think his defense is as strong as he is making it out to be.
With rijkaard/becken. swapping roles as a sweeper, I feel its going to leave lerby to much to do in that midfield with suarez being more of an attacking mid.
You are corret there as by all accounts he was a very complete player and an awesome defender, I was factoring in euro form when calling him the worst CB on the pitch.
My bad, the point remains the same though.
Not really, I am biased yes but he was a wingback in a five man defense if we try to equate it to modern positions. Not really responsible for that much defensive work.
is like watching a professional wrestling match where everyone standing in the corner of the two participants just decide to join in.We haven't sought to portray him as being in world beating form but now you mention it as a defender, those results don't reflect too badly on him - lost 2-1 to the champions, 1-1 vs a tough swedish side and 0-0 vs recent world cup semi finalists England. It was the forwards who should take the brunt of the criticism for France's 1992 showings, 2 goals in three matches for a forward line of Cantona and Papin is shite.
Amoros is still Amoros though so even as a 30 year old, you can guarantee he'll put in a solid shift here. He wasn't to blame for the poor results at all and done his job.
It's a fair point that this isn't absolute peak Amoros. This is the steady hand who was one of France's best players in 1992, their captain, and performed well during that tournament.
I would say there are two players on the park who didn't play their very best at the Euros - that's Amoros and Schweinsteiger. Schweiny's best tournaments were mostly in the World Cup and while he was decent enough in the Euros, he didn't shine in the same way. He wasn't in the top 15 average rated midfielders at Euro 2012 or Euro 2008.
Obviously though Schweinsteiger is in the heart of a midfield battle, any shortcomings there will be exposed. Amoros isn't directly facing a left winger apart from an occasionally drifting Puskas. But with Beckenbauer and Kohler in support, that's not really a concern in the grand scheme of things.
Otherwise though apart from those two, we are talking about 20 players with strong Euro CVs.
I would say all the other fullbacks in the game, had more of an impact on the tournament than amoros though. And amoros does have a very vital role in your game, being responsible for providing width as ibra wont drift as much as henry.
Fair enough regarding schweign, he did have some very good performances though during euro 2012 as well. That france side was really disappointing though, so calling him one of their best players isnt really a complement.
I was more concerned about his attacking contribution since the wingbacks are pretty crucial to this encounter with the middle being extremely crowded as it is than his defensive work.
and zebec!
It's great stuff. None of this nicey "after you sir" etiquette we've come to expect recently in the draft.
Well, Italy except Maldini did feck all defensively. Tbh, imo if you look truly only at Euro peaks, the only two defenders who stand above all are Maldini and Blanc...and you are facing Blanc.
Can I ask how exactly do you expect to stop puskas given that zebec's yugo conceded loads of goals against weaker strikers?