The Impossible Draft - SF: Gio vs idmanager

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

vs

..................................................... TEAM GIO ................................................................................................... TEAM IDMANAGER ...................................

​

TEAM GIO

TACTICS:
​

A 4-2-3-1 built around unmatched midfield control, with a multi-faceted attack filled with world-class forwards and an effective and complementary backline.

ATTACK
​

The greatest forward in British football history, Denis Law leads the line - a Ballon d'Or winner who rattled 85 goals in 94 games at his peak. Law is one of the most rounded footballers of all time who combines constant goal threat with world class playmaking, hold-up play and pressing from the front. With the creativity provided by Falcao, Zidane and Kubala Law is guaranteed a host of chances which he is always liable to put away. Stylistically we fancy his movement, technique and aerial ability to be too hot to handle for Ecstatic's centre-backs.

Lightning quick, fearless, dynamic, good with both feet, spectacular - and sometimes unbelievably devastating - in the air, he was as near as damn it the perfect goalscoring individual.

One of the greatest left wingers of all time and mainstay of the Might Magyars, Zoltan Czibor dominated the left flank during the 1950s with his pace and dribbling ability. With his propensity for classic wing-play and ability to hug the touchline, Czibor offers a balance to the side and pin-point crossing ability - he looks set to provide a constant target for Zidane's through balls and we see him providing huge assist potential for Law and Kubala. On the opposite wing is Czibor's Barcelona teammate and the man declared Barcelona's best ever player in 1999, László Kubala, who will support Law from the right and get on the end of Czibor's delivery in the very same way he did at the Nou Camp. With 280 goals in 345 games for Barcelona, Kubala's combination of power, trickery and eye for a goal poses real problems for Moby's backline.

MIDFIELD
​

The midfield is headed up by the maestro Zinedine Zidane who provides the link to the attack with his supreme technical ability and guaranteed stream of service. He'll be in his element with willing runners and quality ahead while sparking off another creative genius in the centre of midfield.

Zidane is the master. Over the past 10 years, there's been no-one like him.

Zidane is unique. He is more like a dancer than a football player.

Behind him a South American tandem of Paulo Roberto Falcão and Nestor Gonçalves provides a technically exquisite and defensively solid platform for the rest of the team. Both players dominated European opposition throughout their careers, with Goncalves the defensive midfield backbone of the great Penarol side that won 9 league titles between 1958 and 1968, three Copa Libertadores wins, two Intercontinental Cup wins (overcoming Eusebio's Benfica and Real Madrid) and the Intercontinental Cup Winners Supercup (defeating Pele's Santos). Falcao requires no introduction and remains the standout midfield playmaker in the pool, with his performances for Brazil in 1982 the stuff of legend, and like Law at Old Trafford he was crowned the King of Rome after he led Roma to their first league title in 40 years.

DEFENCE
​

In defence Andreas Brehme is one of the greatest full-backs of all time and his ability to control a game from full-back is almost unmatched, he will link up well with Falcao and Kubala ahead of him, while Law will relish his accurate crossing. On the opposite flank, Silvio Marzolini is the best Argentinian left-back of all time and his reading of the game, positioning and anticipation were all world-class. In the heart of defence we have made a significant double upgrade to marry the best of yore with the best of today. Diego Godin is arguably the finest defender post Nesta/Rio and has been at the heart of the most watertight defensive unit in the modern game, further strengthening his CV again this summer. The Divine Master Domingos Da Guia is the consensus choice as Brazil's greatest ever centre half and is comfortably ensconced in the top bracket of South American central defenders. In the same way he formed a superb partnership with the Uruguayan Nasazzi in the 1930s, he should dovetail well here with Godin next to him. Behind him is the Boca and Argentina keeper Antonio Roma who formed an integral part of the watertight Argentina back line of the 1960s.

WHY WE WILL WIN:

• Too much firepower. Falcao and Zidane overflow with creativity, providing a steady stream of service for the King Law and the Hungary and Barcelona duo Kubala and Czibor.
• The grizzly Goncalves is just the sort of pain in the arse that Bergkamp won't relish playing against. Further forward, ol divino mestro Da Guia has the impeccable reading of the game required to nullify Bergkamp's invention. In the middle Godin's imperious aerial ability should cancel out Spencer's threat in the air.
• A pair of top class full-backs who will match up well to Idm's wide men. Marzolini's conservative nature and all-round quality should allow him to keep Matthews in check. The two-footed Brehme can control the play from the right and his reading of the game should be well suited to dealing with Gento.
• Idm has a fine midfield partnership, but frankly I back Zidane, Falcao and Goncalves to take control. That makes it 3v2 in there in the absence of any meaningful support from Idm's front four. I feel Davids and Monti could be overworked and Idm's attack could be starved of service.

TEAM IDMANAGER


Setup:

In goal, we have Jose Luis Chilavert, one of the greatest modern goalkeepers.
In defence we have Karl Heinz Forster and Marius Tresor who should be pretty complimentary in a sweeper stopper combination.
The two full backs are Carlos Alberto and Branko Zebec. Both of them are two of the most balanced fullbacks in history who could contribute both in attack and defense.
Only one full back will attack at one time. Considering both were comfortable playing at CB as well, when one attacks, the other would tuck in to form a 3 man shield at the back to not leave gaps for counters.

In the midfield we have Edgar Davids and Luis Monti. Davids plays his B2B role while Monti plays the DM cum deep lying play maker. Monti's deep lying role has been really under appreciated in draft games around here. That is as solid and balanced a midfield as it gets.

In the flanks we have probably the best wing combination of this draft. Francesco Gento and Stanley Matthews need no introduction.
In the middle we have Dennis Bergkamp, who is tailor made for this role. He will be playing the second striker/Number 10 role acting as the bridge linking up the play, bringing others into the game and creating chances at will with his excellent vision. His goal scoring is a great asset as well.
Up front, we have Alberto Spencer who is not just a perfect foil for my wingers but also a great target for Bergkamp is create chance for time and again.

Tactics:

We will be playing direct football getting the ball as soon as possible to the three greats behind Spencer to work their magic.
Quick play at a high tempo will be a feature of the team not giving too much time for the opponents to react and organize themselves.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

@Gio @idmanager All the best again

 

[Gio]

 

[Gio]

I'm sure everyone is au fait with what Zidane and Falcao bring to the table, but anyone unfamiliar with Tito Goncalves is recommended to have a gander at the profile below:

Néstor Tito Gonçalves (Peñarol 1957-71)

In 1957, the club went into an economy drive, but it was clear that penny-pinching wasn’t going to also fix the problem of Nacional winning the last three league titles while the team transitioned. It was unacceptable. This prompted an initiative that would be the start of an ongoing advantage for Peñarol.

Uruguay has always been very Montevideo-centric since half the population live there. In fact, it is only in the last 20 years that teams outside the capital have participated in the Uruguayan League. But half the population doesn’t live there, and the brightest talents weren’t exactly urban types, so they created a formal (not fan-tip based) scout network to identify the best and brightest prospects from towns in the countryside.

This same approach would later be expanded when Real destroyed us (albeit, and crucially, with Tito injured) in the first Intercontinental Final. Their glamour, the way they had collected the best players imaginable, their entire setup… The Board decided the Argies and Brazilians would stay home, but the best of the rest of South America could be lured to come to Peñarol, as Uruguay was comparatively one of the wealthiest and so far the most successful football nation in the continent. And thus came the best players from Ecuador, Perú, Paraguay, Chile… That Peñarol side didn’t just boast the best of Uruguay, two best evers in their roles (nationally), but also the best player Ecuador and Chile ever had. Peñarol's 60s side boiled down to this: it was the "Rest of South America Select XI", playing together for a decade.

Anyhow, I digress, but in that trial run in early 1957, seven players were brought in and two of them would rightfully become club legends. They all went straight into the reserves for a bedding in period - with Cubilla famously complaining about it (“I didn’t leave my town to play for the Reserves”). The one that rose quicker went about things differently, working hard, always looking to learn from his seniors, and within six months everyone could tell that the massive gap left in midfield by Varela’s retirement was destined for him. The timing couldn’t be better, as captain Martínez was bound to have only 3-4 seasons left in him.

Legend has it that Obdulio Varela had left the club at the end of the 1956 season and hadn’t set foot in Las Acacias until he heard about this kid. He visited the club, spent a few hours with him and left for good never to return again safe in the knowledge that his legacy would be in good hands. His name was Néstor “Tito” Gonçalves, and by 1958 he was a nailed on starter. A one-club man, Gonçálves was a tough as nails defensive midfielder with an exceptional passing range, exactly what a deep-sitting counter-attacking side needed. With him from centre-to-left and Abbadie on the right, there was always a nearby outlet.

His arrival was a big contributing factor in kickstarting Peñarol’s most glorious and decorated period. Considered one of the 15 greatest teams of all time, his Peñarol went toe-to-toe regularly with Santos, Real Madrid and Benfica and delivered 9 league titles between 1958 and 1968, three Copa Libertadores wins, two Intercontinental Cup wins and the Intercontinental Cup Winners Supercup. It's on the back of this decade that when the IFFHS tallied up the scores Peñarol came first and was recognised as the Most Successful South American Club of the Century ("Champion of the Century").

His performance in the 1966 final decider is the stuff of legend. I'll have to write about that later but, with Peñarol 2-0 down halfway through the second half, it was his rearguard action (and assist to boot) that kickstarted an epic comeback. To this day an unlikely comeback turned into an onslaught and beating up of the rival is referred to as "ganar a lo Peñarol" (winning the Peñarol way). And to this day River Plate are referred to as "las gallinas" (chicken) for the manner of that defeat. River had everything: youth, a striker having a freak season (still the top scorer in a single Libertadores with 17), they were 2-0 up... What they lacked was the character to put up with the furious thrusts of a battle-hardened side leveraging their class, experience and sheer will to win. Spencer-Abbadie-Spencer-Rocha, 4-2. Is it any wonder what caught my imagination about United?

After retiring he stayed at the club as a coach, and has been heading Youth Development for almost fourty years now. He even managed to get his sperm to produce a CM who would be instrumental for Peñarol’s fifth Libertadores win in 1987*.

Legend.

Speaking at the team hotel after beating Real in Madrid. Peñarol won 4-0 on aggregate. Hours earlier in the dressing room he commented: "I don't know about you, but that was way too easy", and they all agreed: the game against River had been the highlight of their careers.

*The venue for that game was once again Santiago de Chile, and a Peñarol side featuring Gonçalves Jr. and Matosas Jr. beat three-times consecutive finalists América de Cali, 1-0, scoring in the 119:42 min, when a draw after ET would have handed it to the Colombians.

 

[Himannv]

Gento and Matthews on the flanks sounds deadly to me. Two excellent teams here.

 

[Enigma_87]

Didn't Godin win the Copa in 2011?

 

[Gio]

Didn't Godin win the Copa in 2011?

Yeah the Copa is under the wrong player there.

 

[Indnyc]

Didn't Godin win the Copa in 2011?

Yeah he did.. Don’t think Da Guia won the Copa America though

 

[Enigma_87]

Yeah the Copa is under the wrong player there.

Aye, don't think Brazil won it at the time Da Guia was playing so probably you just need to swap them

Yeah he did.. Don’t think Da Guia won the Copa America though

yes, correct!

 

[idmanager]

Good luck @Gio and thanks @Edgar Allan Pillow for sorting out the thread.

Will join the discussion in a couple of hours post work

 

[idmanager]

Gento and Matthews on the flanks sounds deadly to me.

Add Spencer to that and it just becomes even more better. Here's a quote from Pele on him - "Someone that headed better than me was Spencer. I was good (in heading), but he was spectacular heading the ball. In general, he would do it with a burst, but without actually sprinting"

The combination of that front 3 couldn't really have been made better in this draft IMO

 

[Indnyc]

• Idm has a fine midfield partnership, but frankly I back Zidane, Falcao and Goncalves to take control. That makes it 3v2 in there in the absence of any meaningful support from Idm's front four. I feel Davids and Monti could be overworked and Idm's attack could be starved of service.

@idmanager thoughts on this and the overall midfield battle? I feel that is where the game is probably going to be decided.

 

[Enigma_87]

Onto the game, just voting to see the score(mine won't count and even it in case of penos) as it should be a cracker!

Very solid set up from both as expected.

 

[idmanager]

@idmanager thoughts on this and the overall midfield battle? I feel that is where the game is probably going to be decided.

I was going to address this in a while as I wanted to be fully free to answer any responses. But here is the gist.

Firstly, 3 vs 2 is the classic argument against any 4-4-2 and its ridiculous unless you are facing a team with the likes of Xavi/Iniesta or one run by Modric/Kroos.

So lets break down Gio's 3 midfielders.

1. Zidane - Contributes to attack
2. Falcao - Contributes to attack and defense.
3. Goncalves - Contributes to defense.

So in either the defensive or offensive phase of games, you would always majorly have only 2 players.

So does the 3 man midfield doesn't have any benefits? Obviously not. It helps the team hold onto the ball a bit more than the opposition. Which is why its advantage magnifies multitudes of times when you have the likes of Xavi/Iniesta and Modric/Kroos running the game.

Zidane for all his grace was not one to worry about possession and was as direct as it gets. His game was all about quick transitions coupled with excellent skills with the first thought always being to move forward. Having the majority of possession was not what his game was about.

Now even if he does manage to win the possession battle, most 4-4-2 are built with direct football in mind (same as my team here).

Tactics:

We will be playing direct football getting the ball as soon as possible to the three greats behind Spencer to work their magic.
Quick play at a high tempo will be a feature of the team not giving too much time for the opponents to react and organize themselves.

Its not how much of the ball you have is what decided how well it would work. It was about how quickly you could transition the ball after winning it from midfield/defense to attack. Get the wingers and the support striker quickly into the game, etc. So a 3 vs 2 is not very often a huge disadvantage for a 4-4-2.

Which is why Fergie's team's never really struggled using 4-4-2 except for 1 huge giant. That is Barcelona. That is where it breaks. But that is not the sort of game Gio is playing here or has the players to do so.

Now coming to the point most would ignore.

Dennis Bergkamp like dto drop deep to take the ball from the defense and create chances. No one needs to be convinced that he liked to create more than score. Take up any of his compilation and you'd see how many of his moves were from deep. I am pasting one here. Bergkamp will end up playing the Zidane role so many times in the game. Point being, its not a Yorke-Cole sort of a 4-4-2 with Bergkamp in there.

 

[Gio]

Add Spencer to that and it just becomes even more better. Here's a quote from Pele on him - "Someone that headed better than me was Spencer. I was good (in heading), but he was spectacular heading the ball. In general, he would do it with a burst, but without actually sprinting"

Just as well we've got Diego Godin squaring up to him then. Godin's fearless aerial ability makes him a good match for Spencer IMO. Having scored headers in a La Liga title decider, Champions League Final, World Cup and Copa America, he can make that gift count when it matters most.



He gets a lot of respect from me for shining in the most difficult era of any for defenders. Even moreso when he's frequently facing two of the greatest players of all time in a league tailor made for the big boys and teams to rack up as many goals as possible. Atletico's defensive record during that team has been impeccable. That's probably a decade now of brilliance which outstretches pretty much anyone since Nesta.

 

[idmanager]

Just as well we've got Diego Godin squaring up to him then. Godin's fearless aerial ability makes him a good match for Spencer IMO. Having scored headers in a La Liga title decider, Champions League Final, World Cup and Copa America, he can make that gift count when it matters most.



He gets a lot of respect from me for shining in the most difficult era of any for defenders. Even moreso when he's frequently facing two of the greatest players of all time in a league tailor made for the big boys and teams to rack up as many goals as possible. Atletico's defensive record during that team has been impeccable. That's probably a decade now of brilliance which outstretches pretty much anyone since Nesta.

For me, any team facing the likes of Kocsis/Chares/Spencer and the likes needs two great centre backs great in the air.

I am not sure how well Da Guia is rated here but from what I know of him, he was a libero type of a player and that is how his name rose and stayed even after decades.

From what little I know, he was not really a physical champion or a shut the shop kind of defender. You can see the amount of goals he conceded in the major tournaments like 1938 world cup. I even read somewhere that he conceded 3 penalties in that tournament.

I am not sure he is a good fit for Godin who always played in systems where players could depend on the others around them to not commit any mistakes. The organization of the defence and dependence on one other was a key element to his Atletico Madrid glory.

Lets also not forgot Spencer was not just a great header of the ball, he could do it all him self with his pace, dribbling, scoring with either feat. Way more to his game that his heading. He isnt the greatest player in Copa Libertadores history just for his heading ability.

 

[Moby]

Can't agree on Idm's front 4 not providing any help to midfield. Both Gento and Matthews were industrious and would definitely contribute to the battle.

 

[Gio]

I was going to address this in a while as I wanted to be fully free to answer any responses. But here is the gist.

Firstly, 3 vs 2 is the classic argument against any 4-4-2 and its ridiculous unless you are facing a team with the likes of Xavi/Iniesta or one run by Modric/Kroos.

So lets break down Gio's 3 midfielders.

1. Zidane - Contributes to attack
2. Falcao - Contributes to attack and defense.
3. Goncalves - Contributes to defense.

So in either the defensive or offensive phase of games, you would always majorly have only 2 players.

So does the 3 man midfield doesn't have any benefits? Obviously not. It helps the team hold onto the ball a bit more than the opposition. Which is why its advantage magnifies multitudes of times when you have the likes of Xavi/Iniesta and Modric/Kroos running the game.

Not sure I agree with this.

Firstly, Goncalves is clearly a two-way midfielder. His main job here is to anchor the midfield, but he used to create plenty for your man Spencer, Rocha and Joya from the middle of the park. See a few examples here.

Secondly, Zidane clearly contributes more in a midfield sense than Bergkamp will. He was part of the most hard working top club team I can remember in mid-1990s Juventus, and while he had more attacking licence than others, he still did a defensive job and was clearly part of a midfield three in a way that Bergkamp never really was.

Which is why Fergie's team's never really struggled using 4-4-2 except for 1 huge giant. That is Barcelona. That is where it breaks. But that is not the sort of game Gio is playing here or has the players to do so.

Or against Zidane's Real Madrid. Ferguson moved away from 4-4-2 a long time before Barcelona came on the scene because he was fed up of losing control of big European matches and falling short at the business end of the Champions League.

This is what can happen when you lose the midfield against Zidane:

 

[Gio]

Can't agree on Idm's front 4 not providing any help to midfield. Both Gento and Matthews were industrious and would definitely contribute to the battle.

Not sure if that's my take on them. Matthews in particular is always used as the quintessential example of how the game has changed and players don't just stand high on the touchline waiting for the ball to come to them while the opposition goes on the attack.

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

Leaning towards Chilavert deciding this one as everywhere else is pretty balanced out. I don't think Gio has a numerical advantage in midfield. Zidane is an attacking mid and Bergkamp loved to drop deep to initiate attacks and 1-2s so that 3v2 argument doesn't hold for me. If anything I think it would be the Zoltan and Laz that might give Gio a slight advantage. I prefer Czibor to Gento myself. But I don't think that's decisive as this particular 442 looks ready made for quick counters. Biggest quality difference is the keepers for me so leaning for Idm but will have to think more.

 

[idmanager]

Leaning towards Chilavert deciding this one as everywhere else is pretty balanced out. I don't think Gio has a numerical advantage in midfield. Zidane is an attacking mid and Bergkamp loved to drop deep to initiate attacks and 1-2s so that 3v2 argument doesn't hold for me. If anything I think it would be the Zoltan and Laz that might give Gio a slight advantage. I prefer Czibor to Gento myself. But I don't think that's decisive as this particular 442 looks ready made for quick counters. Biggest quality difference is the keepers for me so leaning for Idm but will have to think more.

While the goalkeeper advantage is very obvious, I think the defense in general is better on my side as well.

I am not sure if anyone would prefer Da Guia/Godin over Tresor/Forster.

And no matter how versatile Brehme was, him on the right side would not be of the same level as the him on the left side.

Compare that with Carlos Alberto and Zebec both in their element, I think that is a clear advantage as well.

 

[idmanager]

Secondly, Zidane clearly contributes more in a midfield sense than Bergkamp will.

Perhaps, but the point was Bergkamp will contribute as well coming deep. Its not an out and out 3 vs 2 at all.

This is what can happen when you lose the midfield against Zidane:

Not winning the midfield possession percentage is not the same as losing the midfield.

Its funny, we again return to these static arguments in draft games when that is not how it works in real games.

4-4-2 vs 4-2-3-1? Yea, lets declare that the 4-4-2 loses. Lets ignore that Davids and Monti are the midfield two which is as good a shield as it gets. Its 2 vs 3 with Bergkamp not playing always every minute as a midfielder. Lets declare that the midfield battle is lost no matter what the tactic of the opposition is.

 

[Indnyc]

Perhaps, but the point was Bergkamp will contribute as well coming deep. Its not an out and out 3 vs 2 at all.



Not winning the midfield possession percentage is not the same as losing the midfield.

Its funny, we again return to these static arguments in draft games when that is not how it works in real games.

4-4-2 vs 4-2-3-1? Yea, lets declare that the 4-4-2 loses. Lets ignore that Davids and Monti are the midfield two which is as good a shield as it gets. Its 2 vs 3 with Bergkamp not playing always every minute as a midfielder. Lets declare that the midfield battle is lost no matter what the tactic of the opposition is.

I wasn't making the point on numbers earlier but more on the personnel and how they stack up against each other.

In your team i would ideally have liked someone more b2b than Monti for the 4-4-2 to be perfect. I prefer Gio's front 6 over yours but that is really down to personal preference more that anything else.

Having said that i'll pick your defense over his which makes me lean slightly towards you but will follow discussions some more before voting.

 

[idmanager]

In your team i would ideally have liked someone more b2b than Monti for the 4-4-2 to be perfect

I personally like the ideal 4-4-2 midfield to have one B2B midfielder and one DM cum deep lying play maker. (Which Monti was)

I think 2 B2B MFs can work too, but I prefer having at least one of them not having to move vertically a lot to constantly take care of the opposition Number 10, especially someone of the calibre of Zidane.

In fact Bergkamp's presence in deeper areas makes sure we have no problems building up, which is the only extra thing 2 B2Bs offer more than 1 B2B and 1 DM.

I wasn't making the point on numbers earlier but more on the personnel and how they stack up against each other.

Okay, Gio's point was more on numbers than personnel.

But Monti is unarguably considered among the top most DM's of all time in the top most tier.

Same can be said of Davids in a defensive B2B role.

As far as I can see, a 4-4-2 can't have a far better sheild. Sure, maybe if Matthaus and Rijkaard/Beckenbauer are not blocked. But other than that, we are talking of players who are in the top most tiers.

I think those 2 should be more than enough to block everything centrally.

 

[Enigma_87]

Which is why Fergie's team's never really struggled using 4-4-2 except for 1 huge giant. That is Barcelona. That is where it breaks. But that is not the sort of game Gio is playing here or has the players to do so.

We usually struggled in midfield in a 4-4-2 in Europe with Fergie. We should/could've won much more if he wasn't that stubborn in his approach in his earlier years, and we looked much much better after 06, which goes to show with our success in CL post 07'.

To me with a top class #10 you have to designate a midfielder to watch the space around 10-15 yards of him, regardless of whether he contributes to the midfield battle or not. Zidane I agree won't contribute much but you have to have Monti to watch the space around him, which would definitely isolate Davids and create numerical advantage for Gio during some phases of the play.

With that being said and the advantage in midfield you have that in defence and keeper. Da Guia is not someone I'd rate at all time level and (I don't engage anyone with my opinion of course) to me he's the worst defender on the pitch.

It's a great game and I'd probably would've voted for a tie. Both teams pretty much negate the advantages they have on the field and would be down to personal preference and personnel.

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

We usually struggled in midfield in a 4-4-2 in Europe with Fergie. We should/could've won much more if he wasn't that stubborn in his approach in his earlier years, and we looked much much better after 06, which goes to show with our success in CL post 07'.

To me with a top class #10 you have to designate a midfielder to watch the space around 10-15 yards of him, regardless of whether he contributes to the midfield battle or not. Zidane I agree won't contribute much but you have to have Monti to watch the space around him, which would definitely isolate Davids and create numerical advantage for Gio during some phases of the play.

With that being said and the advantage in midfield you have that in defence and keeper. Da Guia is not someone I'd rate at all time level and (I don't engage anyone with my opinion of course) to me he's the worst defender on the pitch.

It's a great game and I'd probably would've voted for a tie. Both teams pretty much negate the advantages they have on the field and would be down to personal preference and personnel.

That works both ways though. Nestor would have to stay 10-15 yards around Bergkamp which isolates Falcão. Its not a 433 he is up against but a 4231 with an AMC. With Bergkamp as the no.10 this match plays out like 4231 vs 4231 rather than a 442 vs. 433

 

[Don Alfredo]

How is Zebec rated on here? Is he along the highest echelon of LB's?

I know many GOATs are blocked, but this match is nearing GOAT level already. Some GOAT wingers and fullbacks on display, plus Zidane and Falcao as GOAT midfielders. Also no obvious weaknesses by either team and Zebec is facing a formidable player himself in Kubala, who (like many older players) often gets respected but seldom drooled over.

Don't know much about Zebec, does he belong in this company?

Edit: ffs, just as I wrote that about Kubala, Theon comes along and praises him

 

[Theon]

Gento and Matthews on the flanks sounds deadly to me. Two excellent teams here.

I don’t think it’s any better than Czibor / Kubala to be fair. In terms of the left wing Czibor is a top five player of all time and he’s regulalry rated along Dzajic as the best in that post-war era. Personally I’d rate him higher than Gento but there’s very little in it, both were world class exponents of old fashioned wing play win Gento edging it in terms of speed and raw physicality with Czibor being the more rounded goal threat.

For Kubala and Matthews though I’d give the edge comfortably to Kubala, a player rated as Barcelona’s greatest ever who scored 280 goals in 345 games - that’s an exceptional record and he’ll surely cause all sorts of problems for Zebec and Idmanager’s defence, particularly when he cuts inside and overloads that inside right channel (against a defensive midfield which is already overrun).

In comparison to those goal scoring stats at Barcelona, the best goal scoring season for Matthews was 11 goals in his second season at Stoke City. Matthew’s was undoubtedly a great player but at his peak I don’t think he reached the level of Kubala, his legacy is undoubtedly influenced by the fact that he played until he was 50 years old.

In his entire stint at Blackpool he scored 18 goals in 428 games. That’s night and day compared with Kubala.

 

[Theon]

That works both ways though. Nestor would have to stay 10-15 yards around Bergkamp which isolates Falcão. Its not a 433 he is up against but a 4231 with an AMC. With Bergkamp as the no.10 this match plays out like 4231 vs 4231 rather than a 442 vs. 433

Can see what you’re getting at but strongly disagree with this - Zidane was a legitimate midfielder and his starting position was deeper than Bergkamp’s. That’s no slight on Bergkamp and I know you’ll rate him highly (as do I) but I don’t think there’s any doubt that he played further forward than Zidane.

Bergkamp was a second striker at his best. Zidane never played that role, he was a midfielder through and through and was the central focus for midfield transitions in a way that Bergkamp wasn’t.

 

[Enigma_87]

That works both ways though. Nestor would have to stay 10-15 yards around Bergkamp which isolates Falcão. Its not a 433 he is up against but a 4231 with an AMC. With Bergkamp as the no.10 this match plays out like 4231 vs 4231 rather than a 442 vs. 433

I'd agree with what @Theon said but to reiterate.

Bergkamp is much further in the attacking phase for ID. He's a second striker and he'd definitely need him close to Spencer and also being the central conductor of the team, otherwise when they are starved of possession I wouldn't necessarily depend on Davids and Monti to spray passes that would reach the forwards and the wingers. Monti was a DLP but in a much more protective setup to give him the time on the ball compared in a 4-4-2 which requires a lot of agility to transition through the phases. Also there's a reason why Bergkamp was called "the non-flying dutchman" besides afraid to fly and can be eased a bit in terms of covering and distance to mark him, especially when his team is playing on counter.

Bergkamp was great at unlocking the defence in the attacking third, his touch and feel on the ball and also capable of converting even the slighting opportunities into goals - but all that close to the box. Move him in deeper role and he really isn't as good as he was.

 

[Gio]

Leaning towards Chilavert deciding this one as everywhere else is pretty balanced out. I don't think Gio has a numerical advantage in midfield. Zidane is an attacking mid and Bergkamp loved to drop deep to initiate attacks and 1-2s so that 3v2 argument doesn't hold for me. If anything I think it would be the Zoltan and Laz that might give Gio a slight advantage. I prefer Czibor to Gento myself. But I don't think that's decisive as this particular 442 looks ready made for quick counters. Biggest quality difference is the keepers for me so leaning for Idm but will have to think more.

Just on the keepers - they look in the same tier to me. I'm a bit conflicted on Chilavert - I was a big fan of him back in the 1990s, particularly during his Velez Sarsfield days. In the first half of the decade I felt he was quite under-appreciated. But by the second half I started to feel he become over-rated when a lot of his reputation owed to his larger than life personality and his free-kick ability. Certainly into the second half of the 1990s, he was well overweight and could only cut it at the top level with a defence parked on top of him. For me it was Gamarra and Celso Ayala at Paraguay that were the shining lights in that France '98 defensive unit, notwithstanding that Chilavert was still a solid performer. That's not to shit on Chilavert, just to identify that I don't put him in the top tier of South American keepers alongside particularly Mazurkiewicz and Fillol, from what I've seen.

And for me that takes him into a second tier where I put Antonio Roma. As you'd expect he has an exceptional reputation at club level with Boca. And more importantly for the purposes of his overall standing, his World Cup performances in 1962 and 1966 proved he was better than the average South American keeper of the time. Argentina had the best defensive record at the 1966 tournament, conceding just twice in four games. One of those in the controversial match with England when:

Roma made a stupendous, flailing save from Hurst, at point-blank range...

1966 was the best defensive showing of any Argentina team at a World Cup, something which they were unable to match when winning it in 1978 and 1986, nor when coming second in 1990 or 2014. Roma had a solid defence in front of him with both Marzolini and Perfumo particularly starring, but he was every bit a standout. From what I've researched on him, he had a good spring, a solid rangy frame, plenty of agility and some excellent handling under aerial bombardment. Nothing to suggest 'Tarzan' falls into a lower group of South American keepers IMO.

 

[Pat_Mustard]

I'd agree with what @Theon said but to reiterate.

Bergkamp is much further in the attacking phase for ID. He's a second striker and he'd definitely need him close to Spencer and also being the central conductor of the team, otherwise when they are starved of possession I wouldn't necessarily depend on Davids and Monti to spray passes that would reach the forwards and the wingers. Monti was a DLP but in a much more protective setup to give him the time on the ball compared in a 4-4-2 which requires a lot of agility to transition through the phases. Also there's a reason why Bergkamp was called "the non-flying dutchman" and can be eased a bit in terms of covering and distance to mark him, especially when his team is playing on counter.

Err...I'm pretty sure he was called that because he was terrified of planes and refused to fly, not because of his playing style

 

[Enigma_87]

Err...I'm pretty sure he was called that because he was terrified of planes and refused to fly, not because of his playing style

That was another reason of course and the main one and you are too fast as I was in the middle of editing my post , but he really wasn't that quick off the mark neither known for his slaloming runs from deep

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

Can see what you’re getting at but strongly disagree with this - Zidane was a legitimate midfielder and his starting position was deeper than Bergkamp’s. That’s no slight on Bergkamp and I know you’ll rate him highly (as do I) but I don’t think there’s any doubt that he played further forward than Zidane.

Bergkamp was a second striker at his best. Zidane never played that role, he was a midfielder through and through and was the central focus for midfield transitions in a way that Bergkamp wasn’t.

Bergkamp operated slightly higher up than Zidane but I feel the difference is being exaggerated here. Zidane was alway an AM and not a CM and he regularly slacked off on defensive duties sitting higher up the pitch. Bergkamp in his later years for Arsenal (2000-2005) definitely dropped deeper and was part of transitions so again even if Zidane is slightly deeper, its not like Zidane played as a true CM. He was an AM to me.

I'd agree with what @Theon said but to reiterate.

Bergkamp is much further in the attacking phase for ID. He's a second striker and he'd definitely need him close to Spencer and also being the central conductor of the team, otherwise when they are starved of possession I wouldn't necessarily depend on Davids and Monti to spray passes that would reach the forwards and the wingers. Monti was a DLP but in a much more protective setup to give him the time on the ball compared in a 4-4-2 which requires a lot of agility to transition through the phases. Also there's a reason why Bergkamp was called "the non-flying dutchman" besides afraid to fly and can be eased a bit in terms of covering and distance to mark him, especially when his team is playing on counter.

Bergkamp was great at unlocking the defence in the attacking third, his touch and feel on the ball and also capable of converting even the slighting opportunities into goals - but all that close to the box. Move him in deeper role and he really isn't as good as he was.

Yeah because he didn't fly. In aeroplanes. That was literally the only reason I ever heard for his nickname from the 90s to early 00s. Its not like Zidane was known for his speed and covering the full pitch - I just watched some of the Juventus-RM CL final and I was more impressed with Davids than Zidane (which is what my vague memory is from that match). Also I think you are not remembering how many pre-assists Bergkamp had from starting attacking moves 2000-2005. Maybe he wasn't quite as deep as a true CM but his role certainly made him as involved as the build-up IMO.

Ah, I just saw Pat already mentioned that.

 

[Theon]

Having said that i'll pick your defense over his which makes me lean slightly towards you but will follow discussions some more before voting.

The defences are evenly split, I rate Forster highly so for me there’s maybe a minor edge for Idmanager but it’s less than the quality difference in midfield and attack.

At fullback I’d have it fairly even, potentially a minor left back advantage vs a minor right back advantage (though I wouldn’t overplay that - there’s really nothing between Brehme and Carlos Alberto).

At centre back I’m not even a huge Godin fan, but there’s no doubt that over the last five years he’s performed at a level equivalent (at least) to the performances of Forster and Tresor. He’s been the lynchpin of an Atlético side which has consistently set the global standard when it comes to defensive solidity and performance. There’s no longer much debate that for pure defensive ability he’s the best proponent in the decade since Nesta / Ferdinand. I’d have him ahead of Tresor and at the same level as Forster.

The question mark is then to rate Da Guia.. and that’s a view everyone needs to consider themselves when deciding how to rate older generation players. I think it’s definitely clear that actual footballing quality in those days was miles behind where it is now, but then if you choose to view football in that way (with no regard to the context in which the game was played) then the exact same goes for other players in that era - so in this match it needs to apply to Monti.

Take a look at footage of the 1934 World Cup and you’re looking at midfielders who can barely make an accurate 20 yard pass. It’s a level of football that the likes of Falcão and Zidane would literally run rings around, and an era in which players like Monti owe a lot of there reputation to their ability to physically intimidate (see foul) the opposition attackers.

Now I personally don’t view football that way and when assessing players from prior eras the important think to consider is their relevant standing and reputation within that time. In that respect Da Guia is unquestionable, he’s regarded as the greatest centre back to ever come out of Brazil and a player well ahead of his time when it comes to defensive elegance and possessing the ability to play out of the back. For overall standing in the game it’s arguable that Da Guia would be regarded as the best of the bunch.

Domingos Da Guia: Best Brazilian centre-half ever, by some distance.

My grandfather had a lot of time for him. He reckoned him and Nassazi was the best central partnership he had ever seen. As far as he was concerned (and he watched football up to the mid-90s), the best centre-halves were: 1. Domingos ("you simply could not get past him"), 2. Nasazzi (potential bias there), 3. Moore ("the last centre-half who was a one man defence"), 4. Figueroa (quite reluctantly, since he wasn't a Peñarol fan), 5. Baresi ("defending today is easy, there's like 5-7 defensive-minded players, it's no wonder they can keep clean sheets". He did reckon Baresi was the one who was timeless and could have worked in any era.). Beckenbauer? "He is a midfielder, or whatever you call what he does, whatever it is, it's not being a centre-half".

I included Domingos da Guía without ever seeing him at all, granted. But three things indicate he would be a defo:

1. Widely acknowledged as the best Brazilian CB ever (I lived there three years and whenever the older players listed players -not even defenders, or an XI- he always invariably made that list).
2. He played for Nacional for one year in the early 30s. Fifty years on, my grandfather still had him down as the gold standard. Whenever he assessed a CB, he would rank him 1-10 on a scale where Da Guía was 10. This from someone who had seen Uruguay win two Olympics and World Cups, yet his CB gold standard was based on one year of watching Da Guía week-in week-out.
3. Maybe he saw a one-season wonder? No, more than a decade later, he was selected best player in the 1945 Copa América, despite Brazil not even winning it and him being a CB. As far as I know, the only CB ever to be awarded best player.

 

[Pat_Mustard]

That was another reason of course and the main one and you are too fast as I was in the middle of editing my post , but he really wasn't that quick off the mark neither known for his slaloming runs from deep

I was just being a smart arse mate, although I genuinely hadn't heard that nickname used in reference to his playing style. Thinking about it, we often talk of the different versions of players like Scholes and Schuster, and I wonder if that's a bit overlooked with other players like Bergkamp. I don't think I've ever watched a full match of his from his Ajax days, but from various clips he seemed pretty quick in his younger days, and the stats would indicate he was a more single-minded goalscorer. He says himself that as he got older he started to value making an assist more than scoring himself, and his playing style seemed to shift accordingly. Given the 4-2-3-1 I'd guess Id has Bergkamp's later incarnation in mind, so I'd agree he's not particularly fast in this case.

I don't agree with him and there's probably some degree of bias as he formed a great partnership with Bergkamp and an underwhelming one with Zidane, but Thierry Henry actually rated Bergkamp as the better player:

His Arsenal colleague Thierry Henry, who also played many times with Zinédine Zidane, considered Bergkamp the greater player. Zizou had more tricks, he explained, but Dennis saw the game more quickly and more deeply.

 

[Enigma_87]

Yeah because he didn't fly. In aeroplanes. That was literally the only reason I ever heard for his nickname from the 90s to early 00s. Its not like Zidane was known for his speed and covering the full pitch - I just watched some of the Juventus-RM CL final and I was more impressed with Davids than Zidane (which is what my vague memory is from that match). Also I think you are not remembering how many pre-assists Bergkamp had from starting attacking moves 2000-2005. Maybe he wasn't quite as deep as a true CM but his role certainly made him as involved as the build-up IMO.

Ah, I just saw Pat already mentioned that.

Think it was often said in jest/regards to that nickname when he came to Arsenal and his last year at Inter in terms of slow, sluggish start as he didn't kick it right off at Arsenal from memory and his more easy on the eye style at Inter where he couldn't work with Sosa and was usually attacked by the Italian press.

He was an assist machine, but I think you'd agree that his best came in a strike duo and playing just off the penalty area. As a deeper playmaker think he'd be a tad wasted here, especially considering who is he up against in that zone.

 

[Enigma_87]

I was just being a smart arse mate, although I genuinely hadn't heard that nickname used in reference to his playing style. Thinking about it, we often talk of the different versions of players like Scholes and Schuster, and I wonder if that's a bit overlooked with other players like Bergkamp. I don't think I've ever watched a full match of his from his Ajax days, but from various clips he seemed pretty quick in his younger days, and the stats would indicate he was a more single-minded goalscorer. He says himself that as he got older he started to value making an assist more than scoring himself, and his playing style seemed to shift accordingly. Given the 4-2-3-1 I'd guess Id has Bergkamp's later incarnation in mind, so I'd agree he's not particularly fast in this case.

I don't agree with him and there's probably some degree of bias as he formed a great partnership with Bergkamp and an underwhelming one with Zidane, but Thierry Henry actually rated Bergkamp as the better player:

Maybe in his early days at Ajax you could say he was faster as he started as a winger, but can't really comment on it as I didn't see much of him at that time. I remember more of Kluivert at that time playing for Ajax than Bergkamp to be honest, but from his last season at Inter through his Arsenal career he wasn't as direct as(probably in his younger days).

Take a look at this for example - game against Milan where he was pretty damn good as well:



Wasn't that old - 25-26 something but you can see his style being closer to Riquielme than direct and more explosive #10. Usually he used his brilliant technique and dribbling skills to find some space and look for the pass.

 

[oneniltothearsenal]

Think it was often said in jest/regards to that nickname when he came to Arsenal and his last year at Inter in terms of slow, sluggish start as he didn't kick it right off at Arsenal from memory and his more easy on the eye style at Inter where he couldn't work with Sosa and was usually attacked by the Italian press.

He was an assist machine, but I think you'd agree that his best came in a strike duo and playing just off the penalty area. As a deeper playmaker think he'd be a tad wasted here, especially considering who is he up against in that zone.

Not sure why you are bringing up his Inter stint. That was the low point of his career, not necessarily his fault though as Inter promised different than they delivered. We can discuss that later but its weird to post videos of Bergkamp's low point in caree at Inter. It's like only judging Zidane on his worst games while ignoring his best games.

As I said I followed Bergkamp and Arsenal at the time and I never heard your interpretation of that non-flying Dutchman nickname. I can't really give your claims any legitimacy as I lived through this era and never read such things. Can't pull out my books atm but I can address all this later

 

[Enigma_87]

Not sure why you are bringing up his Inter stint. That was the low point of his career, not necessarily his fault though as Inter promised different than they delivered. We can discuss that later but its weird to post videos of Bergkamp's low point in caree at Inter. It's like only judging Zidane on his worst games while ignoring his best games.

As I said I followed Bergkamp and Arsenal at the time and I never heard your interpretation of that non-flying Dutchman nickname. I can't really give your claims any legitimacy as I lived through this era and never read such things. Can't pull out my books atm but I can address all this later

I was referring more to his style either way mate so it really isn't that important in terms of reference. At Inter he did show some flashes of brilliance and both that game and the year before against Milan he was pretty good, just not that consistent based on reasons you've already mentioned.

Think ID is using peak Bergkamp or the one from 97-99 - at least those are my best memories from him and he was playing closer to goal in a definitely more SS type of role position. Of course feel free to share your thoughts, but really he didn't strike me with particularly "flying" style at his time at Arsenal either.

You do have a point in Zidane as he wasn't that explosive either but he was more of a midfielder than a SS and his role included more vertical movement compared to Bergkamp.


Here's a bit from his own interview and the transition of his style from Ajax days to Inter/Arsenal.

A hundred-odd goals, top scorer in the Dutch league for three seasons in a row... you went from being a great goalscorer at Ajax to a scorer of great goals for the rest of your career. What changed?
Olly Parker, Birmingham
My role changed. At Ajax you knew you'd get five chances a game. At Inter you were lucky if you got one. And at Arsenal I was always more comfortable playing behind a striker, just outside the box. It wasn't my quality to go in the box at the right time and tap in. I was always amazed by players like Ian Wright. He was unbelievable at that.