The Road Trip Draft QF: Indnyc vs harms

Who will win the game based on all the players at their peaks?


  • Total voters
    25
  • Poll closed .
José Nasazzi - "El Gran Mariscal" ("The Great Marshal")

LEGENDS_134_Nasazzi.JPG


The World Cup winning captain and defensive rock of first global super power in Football. To say Uruguay dominated the world of football in the 20s is an understatement, not only did they lifted the Jules Rimet trophy for the first time, they also were winners of Olympic tournaments in 1924 and 1928. FIFA recognize those two tournaments as the de-facto World Cup and that is the reason Uruguay are allowed to sport 4 stars on their jersey.

In 1924, the Uruguay team traveled to Paris to become the first South American team to compete in the Olympic Games. In contrast to the physical style of the European teams of the era, Uruguay played a style based around short passes. European and South American nations had never met in a competitive environment before the Paris Olympics of 1924, and as the only South American representatives little was known about the side managed by Ernesto Figoli and captained by 23-year-old legend-in-waiting José Nasazzi. Italy and Hungary were favorites, but it became rapidly apparent that the tournament's star attraction – and therefore the Games' biggest draw, because football had become vital to the coffers of the organising committee – were the mysterious visitors from a faraway southern land.

When Uruguay played their first game in the Olympic tournament of 1924 the people of Paris took little notice. A Sunday match between Italy and Spain at Stade de Colombes drew a crowd of 20,000. When Uruguay faced Yugoslavia at the same stadium a day later, on 26 May, only a few hundred turned up, unaware they were about to witness something very special.

Yugoslavia, having sent spies to watch a Uruguay training session, predicted an easy win and apologised in advance for sending the South Americans home after only one game. Uruguay beat them 7-0. They had learnt of the presence of the spies and deliberately misplaced their shots and passes in training. Three days later, Uruguay defeated the United States 3-0.

Italy's Gazzetta dello Sport wrote of Uruguay's "musical phrasing" on the pitch, of their "stylistic perfection". The editor ofL'Equipe, Gabriel Hanot, who had himself played at international level, said Uruguay's players were "like thoroughbreds next to farm horses" in comparison to north European players. Word quickly spread, and 45,000 people saw Uruguay trounce France 5-1 in the quarter-finals. In the semis there were nearly six times more spectators at Uruguay's tie than there were at the other tie.

Four years later, European sides were more alert to the dangers posed by South American opponents at the Amsterdam Games of 1928, but remained powerless to resist. Argentina made its entrance to the big stage, 17 countries participated (England boycotted 1924 and 1928 over allowing the entrance of semi-pros), 11 from Europe, Egypt, USA, Mexico, Chile, Argentina and the eventual champs, Uruguay. Uruguay and a highly offensive Argentina swept their way to the final, Uruguay winning the replay 2-1 after the first match had ended all square. Uruguay were back-to-back champions of the world – the three main stands of the Centenario Stadium in Montevideo are named the Colombes, Amsterdam and Olympic Stands, in memory of those triumphs.

The Olympic tournament would never again have the same status, and Uruguay would not feature in it again until London 2012, but no matter; in the summers of 1924 and 1928, world football gained its first true superpower. I'd say those four stars are more than justified.

Now its easy to be considered a legend by association with a great team, especially in the light of lack of footage available. But his record and the individual accolades he won are a testament to the fact that he was no mere cog, but was absolute bed rock on which Uruguay’s world conquering success was built on. He was declared the best player of tournament in World Cup 1930, to this day the only defender to have won this accolade. But that was no fluke as he also won the best player award in Copa America 1923 and 1935, while leading his team to victories. This award haul is probably unique in world football for a defender and I think he is one of the most successful NT player of all time.

He led his team to 7 international tournaments and won 6 of them, here’s Uruguay’s record with him -

CA before 3rd, with 1st, 1st, 1st, without 2nd, with 3rd, 1st, after 3rd

WC before -, with 1st, after -

OL before -, with 1st, 1st, after -

Could've won second World Cup 1934, but his country didn't want to participate.
 
José Nasazzi - "El Gran Mariscal" ("The Great Marshal")

LEGENDS_134_Nasazzi.JPG


The World Cup winning captain and defensive rock of first global super power in Football. To say Uruguay dominated the world of football in the 20s is an understatement, not only did they lifted the Jules Rimet trophy for the first time, they also were winners of Olympic tournaments in 1924 and 1928. FIFA recognize those two tournaments as the de-facto World Cup and that is the reason Uruguay are allowed to sport 4 stars on their jersey.

In 1924, the Uruguay team traveled to Paris to become the first South American team to compete in the Olympic Games. In contrast to the physical style of the European teams of the era, Uruguay played a style based around short passes. European and South American nations had never met in a competitive environment before the Paris Olympics of 1924, and as the only South American representatives little was known about the side managed by Ernesto Figoli and captained by 23-year-old legend-in-waiting José Nasazzi. Italy and Hungary were favorites, but it became rapidly apparent that the tournament's star attraction – and therefore the Games' biggest draw, because football had become vital to the coffers of the organising committee – were the mysterious visitors from a faraway southern land.

When Uruguay played their first game in the Olympic tournament of 1924 the people of Paris took little notice. A Sunday match between Italy and Spain at Stade de Colombes drew a crowd of 20,000. When Uruguay faced Yugoslavia at the same stadium a day later, on 26 May, only a few hundred turned up, unaware they were about to witness something very special.

Yugoslavia, having sent spies to watch a Uruguay training session, predicted an easy win and apologised in advance for sending the South Americans home after only one game. Uruguay beat them 7-0. They had learnt of the presence of the spies and deliberately misplaced their shots and passes in training. Three days later, Uruguay defeated the United States 3-0.

Italy's Gazzetta dello Sport wrote of Uruguay's "musical phrasing" on the pitch, of their "stylistic perfection". The editor ofL'Equipe, Gabriel Hanot, who had himself played at international level, said Uruguay's players were "like thoroughbreds next to farm horses" in comparison to north European players. Word quickly spread, and 45,000 people saw Uruguay trounce France 5-1 in the quarter-finals. In the semis there were nearly six times more spectators at Uruguay's tie than there were at the other tie.

Four years later, European sides were more alert to the dangers posed by South American opponents at the Amsterdam Games of 1928, but remained powerless to resist. Argentina made its entrance to the big stage, 17 countries participated (England boycotted 1924 and 1928 over allowing the entrance of semi-pros), 11 from Europe, Egypt, USA, Mexico, Chile, Argentina and the eventual champs, Uruguay. Uruguay and a highly offensive Argentina swept their way to the final, Uruguay winning the replay 2-1 after the first match had ended all square. Uruguay were back-to-back champions of the world – the three main stands of the Centenario Stadium in Montevideo are named the Colombes, Amsterdam and Olympic Stands, in memory of those triumphs.

The Olympic tournament would never again have the same status, and Uruguay would not feature in it again until London 2012, but no matter; in the summers of 1924 and 1928, world football gained its first true superpower. I'd say those four stars are more than justified.

Now its easy to be considered a legend by association with a great team, especially in the light of lack of footage available. But his record and the individual accolades he won are a testament to the fact that he was no mere cog, but was absolute bed rock on which Uruguay’s world conquering success was built on. He was declared the best player of tournament in World Cup 1930, to this day the only defender to have won this accolade. But that was no fluke as he also won the best player award in Copa America 1923 and 1935, while leading his team to victories. This award haul is probably unique in world football for a defender and I think he is one of the most successful NT player of all time.

He led his team to 7 international tournaments and won 6 of them, here’s Uruguay’s record with him -

CA before 3rd, with 1st, 1st, 1st, without 2nd, with 3rd, 1st, after 3rd

WC before -, with 1st, after -

OL before -, with 1st, 1st, after -

Could've won second World Cup 1934, but his country didn't want to participate.

Don’t like this statement. Scotland could say the same every tournament :)
 
Understand the concerns people have with Nasazzi but as pre war players go, he was up there by all accounts amongst the best.
 
Don’t like this statement. Scotland could say the same every tournament :)
:lol::lol: True.. I just wanted to highlight the guy was pretty much to gold standard of defenders pre war.. How he would do in a modern format is really up to interpretation..
 
I can understand your scepticism regarding Shesternyov, but I don't think you can argue with the fact that he has a much better cover comparing to Nasazzi. Not to mention a clean record against Law (it's only one game, but he was absolutely immense in it and didn't allow Law & co, that just beat England 3:2 at Wembley and were in top form, anything).

His pace is also a nice option, considering Giggs on his side.

Yeah that is true.
 
Roy Keane vs. Edgar Davids will be a defining battle in the midfield. Keane has played Davids 4 times and never lost (3 wins, 1 draw). This includes arguably his most famous game for us vs. Juventus. I don't see us losing control of the middle of the pitch



Even with Maradona, i would rate my attack higher.. Especially given the fact that the Holy Trinity have played together for so long and understand each other so much better
 
PREBEN ELKJÆR: THE LAST OF FOOTBALL’S TRUE MAVERICKS

IqxBXJ4.png


The date is 5 June 1985 and, in Copenhagen, Denmark have just beaten the Soviet Union 4-2 in World Cup qualifying group 6. It’s quite possibly the very plateau above cloud level when it comes to 1980s football hipsterism.

The game included vibrant, passionate and partisan home support, two fantastically evocative kits, two sides capable of very distinct and beautiful football, a screamer from Oleg Protasov, an emphatic finish from Sergey Gotsmanov, the woodwork hit on multiple occasions, multiple goal-line clearances, a wonderful example of how erratic Danish international goalkeepers used to be prior to the rise of Peter Schmeichel, and two goals apiece from Michael Laudrup and Preben Elkjær Larsen.

Elkjær is a mystical figure; widely overshadowed by Laudrup over the course of the last three decades, but massively revered by those who witnessed his unique style of play. In fairness, it’s impossible to draw yourself away from the urge to compare with Laudrup when it comes to Elkjær. However, when you do, it ends up being more a case of noticing the contrasts than drawing the parallels.

For the geometrical vision, you got from Laudrup. Elkjær instead offered a bewitching free-spirited hypnotism. For the crystal-clear still waters, which seemed to run through Laudrup, Elkjær gave you a passionate volatility. For Laudrup’s honed physical condition and his intense professionalism, Elkjær was a heavy smoker and renowned for nights out prior to big games. For Laudrup’s mastery of the ball, which almost appeared to be a pre-programmed concept, Elkjær often struck the image of a man trying to control a small and excitable dog beneath his feet, as he swept past all-comers with an unorthodox beauty.

While Laudrup’s career path was entirely textbook for a man of his many outstanding talents, Elkjær instead undertook a wonderfully meandering route through his. Laudrup, with a career which took in a flirtation with Liverpool, before spells with Juventus, Barcelona and Real Madrid, is vividly contrasted by Elkjær, who spent his peak years with Lokeren and Hellas Verona.

Elkjær’s formative years within the professional game go a long way in explaining why he later allowed his career to take a more sedate path. Fast-tracked into the Denmark under-21 side at the age of 18, he quickly became one of Europe’s most sought-after teenagers after scoring seven goals in just 15 outings for Vanløse IF.

By the age of 19, and during the early exchanges of the 1976/77 season, Elkjær was heading to the Bundesliga, with FC Köln edging out VfB Stuttgart in a hotly contested battle for his services. His debut for the club came swiftly, as he was thrown into a second round, second leg UEFA Cup encounter with Grasshoppers Zürich, making an explosive entrance for his new team by scoring twice in a 3-2 victory.

Within days Elkjær had made his Bundesliga bow, during a defeat to Borussia Mönchengladbach, going on to score in the very next game against Duisburg. The initial spotlight was a blinding one, and he was once more thrown into the starting line-up at Loftus Road against Queens Park Rangers in the UEFA Cup. A chastening evening in west London ended in a 3-0 defeat, and he appeared only as a late substitute during the second leg, when the Germans almost completed an unlikely comeback.

Having played regularly during the autumn months of 1976, Elkjær laboured towards the winter and onward through the early spring. Under the disciplinarian regime of the legendary Hennes Weisweiler, he struggled to get to grips with the focused and often clinical West German approach to the game – and to life itself – within a high rolling Bundesliga club environment.


The teenage Elkjær embraced life away from the club a little too much for the liking of Weisweiler. One infamous occurrence, when reports of Elkjær being out on the town in the days leading up to an important match surfaced, brought a heated exchange of views between coach and player. When Weisweiler confronted him over having been seen in a nightclub with a bottle of whisky and a member of the opposite sex, Elkjær reassured his coach it wasn’t true. Instead, he confirmed it was, in fact, a bottle of vodka and two women.

After a few months in exile, Elkjær returned to the side during the run-in, appearing as a substitute in the final of the Pokal and claiming a winners’ medal after a replay. Just over three weeks later, he was scoring twice on his full international debut as Denmark won 2-1 in Helsinki against Finland.

Despite the polarising nature of the season, Elkjær had enjoyed a successful climax to 1976/77, yet he was very much a man on the outside looking in when the 1977/78 campaign began. By February 1978, both player and club had decided that the best course of action was for him to move on. Despite this, Elkjær has consistently stated that Weisweiler was the best coach he ever played under.

Had either party been willing to offer the olive branch, then many of Köln’s late-1970s and early-80s near-misses might have been converted into silver-laden seasons. However, in February 1978, Köln were on the brink of completing a German league and cup double, with Elkjær a precociously talented but troublesome 20-year old. An opportunity to link the Dane with the up and coming Bernd Schuster was lost on the club.

Blessed with a great many admirers but willing suitors in short supply, it was Lokeren who ambitiously took the plunge in signing Elkjær. In Belgium, he would find an environment much more to his liking, and the less pressurised atmosphere brought the best out of him.

Lokeren, traditionally sat a long way behind the likes of Anderlecht, Club Brugge and Standard Liège in the Belgian food chain, and further lost within the shadow of the strong emergence of near geographical rivals Beveren, added Elkjær to a side which was unlikely to challenge for honours but one which was capable of fluid and entertaining football. It was also a club that had only ascended to the Belgian top-flight for the very first time in 1974.

The Lokeren which Elkjær walked into in February 1978 was struggling in the lower reaches of the table, but was also just one season on from their first season in European competition, having qualified for the 1976/77 UEFA Cup, even managing a win on home soil against Barcelona.

Despite the underdog nature of his new club, Elkjær would spend a happy, if trophyless, six years with the Belgians, teaming up in a wonderfully attack-minded side with the brilliant Polish duo of Włodzimierz Lubański and Grzegorz Lato, the 1973 tormentors of Sir Alf Ramsey and the England national side.

The 1980/81 season would be the high point, finishing a distant runner-up in the top-flight to Anderlecht, and losing the Belgian Cup final to Standard – a season in which they also reached the quarter-finals of the UEFA Cup, going out narrowly to eventual beaten finalists AZ Alkmaar. It was a run in which they defeated Jim McLean’s rising Dundee United and LaLiga champions-elect, Real Sociedad.


From the highs of 1980/81, Lokeren began to fade over the course of the following seasons, but it was arguably the fact that Elkjær had essentially dropped out of the football rat-race in joining the Belgian club that made him so explosive on the international scene. As Lokeren’s star began to fade, Denmark’s simultaneously began to rise.

In June 1981, Denmark defeated World Cup winners to be Italy 3-1 in Copenhagen in a World Cup qualifier. In what had proved to be an inconsistent campaign for the Danes, the win wouldn’t be enough to see them obtain a place at Spain 82, but it did serve as a watermark moment, a moment in which a nation and its football team were infused with the belief that they could move mountains.

Two years later, Denmark were rated by many to be one of the finest international sides in Europe. The advent of the Danish Dynamite era was given its greatest credence when they went to Wembley in September 1983 for a crucial European Championship qualifier, coming away with a 1-0 victory. Yet it wasn’t just the win which made people sit up and take notice; it was the manner of the performance, on an evening when England were fortunate to escape with a narrow loss. Ironically, Elkjær was missing from the side that won at Wembley. His absence only served to keep one of Denmark’s most powerful weapons a partially hidden secret as Euro 84 appeared upon the horizon.

Denmark, playing at the finals of a major tournament for only the second time in their history, embraced Euro 84 enthusiastically. Led by the German coach Sepp Piontek, they made the host nation, France, work hard for their narrow 1-0 win in the opening game at the Parc des Princes.

Forced to adjust their formation for the second game against Yugoslavia in Lyon due to their most recognisable star Allan Simonsen breaking his leg in the loss to France, Denmark jolted into gear. Elkjær was at his belligerent best as the Danes ran out 5-0 winners, scoring the fourth goal. It was a result that set up a winner-takes-all decider in Strasbourg against Belgium, with a place in the semi-finals the prize.

Belgium, the nation that had become Elkjær’s home-from-home, was the place where he had found the freedom of football with which to blossom to his true potential. Now his adopted nation stood between his home nation and a place in the last four of the European Championship.

In an explosive game, Jan Ceulemans and a spectacular strike from Franky Vercauteren shot Belgium into a 2-0 lead by the 39th minute. Belgium, with their greater experience at international tournaments, looked set to overcome the outrageously talented but wide-eyed Danes. Just two minutes later, however, Elkjær won a controversial penalty, which was converted by Frank Arnesen.

The unrelenting pace of the game continued in the second half, and when Pointek switched formations in the 56th minute, it was a move which brought near-immediate dividends. On the hour, substitute Kenneth Brylle netted the equaliser.


The whole emphasis of the game changed, as with their superior goal difference Denmark were now in possession of a potential semi-final spot. It was here that Elkjær took control, constantly handed the ball by his teammates in a bid to frustrate their opponents into an error at the back.

Six minutes from time, and in typical Elkjær style, he weaved his way into the Belgium penalty area before dinking the ball over the advancing Jean-Marie Pfaff in goal. The 3-2 victory sent Denmark back to Lyon to face Spain in the semi-finals.

On another dramatic evening, Søren Lerby put the Danes into an early lead, only to see Antonio Maceda draw Spain level midway through the second half. In an intriguing contrast of skilled Scandinavian footballing up against almost laconic Iberian confidence, the game drifted towards a penalty shoot-out.

As proves to be the case so many times in these circumstances, the pronounced on-pitch directors of these games often end up being the ones who miss the vital spot-kicks. Elkjær, having done so much to bring Denmark so close to the final of Euro 84, had to be the man to miss from 12 yards.

For Elkjær, the bitter disappointment of defeat was offset in the summer of 1984 when, with a massively raised profile, Elkjaer finally departed Lokeren to return to the bright lights of one of the games major arenas. Verona made their move to take Elkjaer to Serie A.

Verona had begun the decade languishing in Serie B, having spent most of the 1970s in the top division, even reaching the final of the Coppa Italia in 1976. In 1981, however, the club narrowly survived a close flirtation with relegation to Serie C1, and in their desperation to escape the decay they were in danger of falling into, the club turned to Osvaldo Bagnoli to be their new coach. Bagnoli proved to be the spark to a remarkable turnaround in fortunes. Within a year, Verona were back in Serie A.

Contrary to popular belief, Verona’s eventual 1984/85 Serie A title win wasn’t as outlandish as the legend insists it to be. Upon their return to the top-flight, Verona finished their first season back in the big time in fourth position, gaining qualification for the following season’s UEFA Cup. This was coupled with a run to the final of the Coppa Italia, where they fumbled the advantage of a 2-0 first leg win when they lost the second leg 3-0 in Turin against the Juventus of Platini, Tardelli, Rossi and Boniek.

A season later, in 1983/84, they finished in sixth position and once again reached the final of the Coppa Italia, where they narrowly lost to a Roma side which was still grieving the loss of the European Cup final to Liverpool.

The addition of Elkjær to the mix of Bagnoli’s Verona was always going to bring a positive combustibility to the 1984/85 campaign. With a slowly ageing Juventus off the pace domestically, Roma rebuilding under Sven-Göran Eriksson, AC Milan making a slow and methodical return to the glories of old, and Inter Milan struggling to find the right combination of players to mount a challenge for a title which was theirs for the taking, it essentially left the door open for any club with a well-drilled plan allied to a cohesive and vibrant squad of players.


Bagnoli’s Verona happened to be in possession of exactly that. It was a side built upon the watertight goalkeeping of Claudio Garella, the defensive solidity of West German international Hans-Peter Briegel, the midfield drive of Pietro Fanna and Antonio Di Gennaro, and headed by the attacking prowess of Giuseppe Galderisi. Placing Elkjær into the side was an act of genius.

Elkjær was off the mark in just his second game, scoring the third goal in a 3-1 win away to Ascoli. He was soon on target again, in a 2-0 home victory over Juventus, a goal which is still revered to this day – scored at the end of a determined run during which Elkjaer lost his right boot, eventually burying his effort with his bootless foot.

Undefeated until January, Verona powered forward – almost uncontrollably – beyond the rest of their Serie A rivals. A stunning 5-3 victory at Udinese in February encapsulated every aspect of the Verona bandwagon; 3-0 up in 20 minutes, level at 3-3 just short of the hour mark, before replying with two goals in three minutes to settle the issue. Elkjær scored the fifth and final goal of the game.

Majestic throughout March, the nerves began to tell during April, and a 2-1 loss at home to Torino suggested the wheels could yet fall off for Verona. Bagnoli’s side emerged unbeaten from their final five games, however, clinching their unlikely but deserved Scudetto on the penultimate weekend away to Atalanta, coming from behind to gain the one point they needed. Elkjær fittingly scored the title-clinching equaliser.

Verona’s coronation as champions on the final day was marked by a game immersed within the spirit of Elkjær himself – a 4-2 victory over Avellino in which Verona let a 2-0 lead slip before kicking on for the win. Elkjær was once again one of the goalscorers.

That World Cup qualifier in Copenhagen, the one against the Soviet Union, the very plateau of 1980s football hipsterism, was a game which came just two-and-a-half weeks after the Serie A title celebration against Avellino. Elkjær had been made to take a circular career route, but he was now undeniably a man at the peak of his powers, with very few peers within the European game. Elkjaer was a man with only the wider world left to conquer.

By Mexico 86, Denmark were no longer Europe’s best-kept secret. The world knew they were coming, and many expected them to offer the biggest European threat. They swept through a difficult group with three wins from three games as Scotland, Uruguay and West Germany were given no crumbs of comfort.

Elkjær got the only goal against Scotland before hitting a hat-trick against Uruguay during a 6-1 demolition, a game in which Laudrup scored one of the goals of the tournament. When Pointek’s men brushed West Germany aside in the final group game, Denmark found themselves being classed among the favourites to win the tournament.

Two years on from Euro 84, they had matured beautifully. They were now a fitting successor on the world stage to the abdicating Dutch masters. Laudrup, a Serie A title winner himself with Juventus, was operating almost telepathically with Elkjær. Their support cast was a collective of visionaries. Lerby and Arnesen were surrounded by the effervescence of Jesper Olson, the precision and third-eye capabilities of Jan Mølby and the experience of a fit-again Simonsen.



Spain lay in wait at the last-16 stage. It would be an encounter which still ultimately makes little sense over three decades later, as Denmark found themselves on the end of a 5-1 defeat. Leading 1-0 from an Olson penalty, Denmark conceded a careless, unexpected equaliser shortly before half-time. With the sort of classic overconfidence only the supremely gifted sides can produce, Olson went from hero to villain as he presented Emilio Butragueño with the equaliser.

Elkjær was metronomic; driving the ball forward for Denmark, he twice came close to restoring their lead. It was Spain, however, who scored next, Butragueño striking again. Olson then compounded his error during the equaliser by giving away a penalty for 3-1. Throughout it all, Denmark and Elkjær continued to plough forward. During the final 10 minutes of the game, Spain scored twice more.

La Roja were outstanding on the day, but it remains one of the strangest defeats in the history of the game. The loss to suspension of Arnesen proved to be the costliest problem. Also, the omission of Mølby, who had played against West Germany, was a vital error. Without Arnesen and Mølby, Denmark were too thin in midfield, and it meant Spain could repeatedly cut through them with ease. In the heat of Mexico, Pointek got his tactics and formation badly wrong.

Mexico 86 was a lost opportunity for Denmark and Elkjær. Essentially at the peak of his powers in Mexico, by the time Euro 88 arrived, the Danish ship had sailed. Elkjær scored the goal which gained Denmark’s participation in West Germany but they returned home after three defeats in three games. The midfielder, having played in the first two matches, against their recurring nemesis Spain and then West Germany, sat out the final encounter against Italy. The game against West Germany proved to be his last in international football.

At Verona, the intervening years between Mexico 86 and Euro 88 had been fruitful on a personal level for Elkjær but hit and miss collectively. The 1986/87 season brought a fourth-place finish in Serie A – any hopes of another title challenge undone by too many draws – while 1987/88 was a difficult season domestically, offset by a run to the quarter-finals of the UEFA Cup, where they narrowly lost out to Werder Bremen.

That year, 1988, marked the end of Elkjær’s associations with both his national team and Verona. Returning to his homeland to play for Vejle BK, he provoked a huge surge of interest in the club. Unfortunately, he was restricted in games by a series of injuries, which eventually saw him call time on his career in 1990.

In Elkjær’s absence, Piontek’s Denmark failed to qualify for Italia 90, losing out on a place in the finals to Romania. By 1992 they were the most unlikely champions of Europe, when brought into Euro 92 as a late replacement for Yugoslavia. Richard Møller Nielsen’s workmanlike side managed to succeed where Pointek’s purveyors of bohemian football had fallen short.

Just as with Weisweiler at Köln, Elkjær’s working relationship with Pointek had been at times volatile. Yet beyond football, they’ve gone on to forge a strong friendship together.

Elkjær’s career was a rich and diverse one, which took in unexpected successes with surprise rising forces: the Serie A title, coming so close to Euro 84 glory, and twice in the top three for the Ballon d’Or. As much as for his career largely spent off the beaten track, Elkjær’s almost mystical position within the game owes just as much to him becoming a recluse during retirement.

A short and inauspicious time as head coach of Silkeborg IF and occasional forays into television work in his home nation aside, Elkjær has kept himself within the shadows of the European and global stage, a wonderfully evocative contrast to the still omnipresent Laudrup. That doesn’t change the fact, however, that he is one of the last of the true mavericks of world football.
 
Last edited:
Roy Keane vs. Edgar Davids will be a defining battle in the midfield. Keane has played Davids 4 times and never lost (3 wins, 1 draw). This includes arguably his most famous game for us vs. Juventus. I don't see us losing control of the middle of the pitch
If Roy Keane vs Edgar Davids will be a defining battle in midfield, I assume that Maradona is going to have a free reign? Keane's performance against Juventus is legendary, but here he is up against Maradona, a player that is not only better than Zidane, it's a player with much more mental toughness and will to win that 99' Juve's Zizou. Rijkaard with the support of Baresi, Costacurta, Maldini and Tassotti struggled to stop Maradona at his best, and you're saying that a midfield with Keane, Sir Bobby and Edwards is going to be enough to stop him, Davids and Schuster?

Perhaps Schuster is getting a bit underrated here as well. This is a man who, after Maradona left for Napoli, took everything in his hands and lead Barcelona to the first league title in 11 years. He was voted 3rd in 1985 Ballon d'Or vote (behind Platini and a certain Elkjær), despite the fact that he hadn't even played a game for Germany (due to personal reasons).
 
If Roy Keane vs Edgar Davids will be a defining battle in midfield, I assume that Maradona is going to have a free reign? Keane's performance against Juventus is legendary, but here he is up against Maradona, a player that is not only better than Zidane, it's a player with much more mental toughness and will to win that 99' Juve's Zizou. Rijkaard with the support of Baresi, Costacurta, Maldini and Tassotti struggled to stop Maradona at his best, and you're saying that a midfield with Keane, Sir Bobby and Edwards is going to be enough to stop him, Davids and Schuster?

Perhaps Schuster is getting a bit underrated here as well. This is a man who, after Maradona left for Napoli, took everything in his hands and lead Barcelona to the first league title in 11 years. He was voted 3rd in 1985 Ballon d'Or vote (behind Platini and a certain Elkjær), despite the fact that he hadn't even played a game for Germany (due to personal reasons).

No i am saying my midfield has as good a chance of stopping Maradona at his best as any midfield. Maradona of course is your biggest threat and if we can reduce his influence, we have a great chance of winning

Keane and Davids are playing in similar positions and it is natural that they would go against each other

Edit: Schuster is a player i am not very familiar with so will refrain from commenting on him too much.. His credentials certainly are great
 
No i am saying my midfield has as good a chance of stopping Maradona at his best as any midfield. Maradona of course is your biggest threat and if we can reduce his influence, we have a great chance of winning

Keane and Davids are playing in similar positions and it is natural that they would go against each other
In your line up Keane is playing defensive midfielder, obviously to "stop" Maradona, as you yourself said. He won't be facing Davids much, if that's the case. If it's not, and he is playing his natural box-to-box role, I'd bet on Maradona to get the best out of the situation. Although I'd still bet on Maradona to get the best out of this situation.

Midfield that had a realistic chance of stopping Maradona was eliminated in the first round. Maradona faced tougher defences than yours and came up top in the end.
 
A fantastic profile on Schuster for those who aren't familiar with him.

La Liga - at Last !
With Maradona having left the Nou Camp for Napoli, the Barca fans approached the 1984-85 season in a far from optimistic mood. Schuster, though, felt the opposite. Despite his rapport with Maradona, Schuster publicly stated that the Argentinian's move away from the Nou Camp would be better for his own game - "Diego's transfer is a loss, but without him in the team I will score the penalties, I will take the free-kicks, I will boss the midfield and we will win the league". Big words indeed from the Blonde Angel. Meanwhile, Terry "El Tel" Venables had been brought in as coach and brought with him a high tempo British attitude and a new striker... Steve Archibald, unheard of in Spain, but rated highly in Britain. The relationship between Venables and Schuster went well in the first season. Venables was impressed with the German's application in training, and built his side around him, even making him the captain. With Schuster being given total freedom he began to dominate games, and the results flowed in. After 11 years without the title Barca finally won La Liga again. Schuster was hailed as the hero of Catalonia, earning rave reviews and being named player of the league week after week. Despite his international absence he was awarded 3rd spot in the European Player of the Year at the end of 1985 for his achievements in Spain and was voted the top foreign player in La Liga.

http://www.midfielddynamo.com/players/profiles/schuster.htm
 
What the hell.. how was indnyc allowed to assemble the holy trinity! With keane and edwards added to it as well!!
 
What the hell.. how was indnyc allowed to assemble the holy trinity! With Keane and edwards added to it as well!!

Think it’s the first time we’ve had the Holy Trinity in these drafts - with Giggs as well to boot. It’s definitely lacking a GOAT centre back but the rest of the side looks fantastic - and the partnerships make it even more than the sum of its parts.

Hard to look past Maradona, but if there’s one man capable of raising his game to snuff him out it would be Roy Keane.
 
in games like this its impossible to vote, two great teams.
 
Had to change my vote reluctantly.

Schuster-Maradona is a brilliant and proven partnership. Blohkin and Elkjaer are brilliant cast who can drag and open spaces for Diego to have his best game. All in all one of the best builds around Diego.

I think harms has enough solidity to hold up Indnyc's attack and score on the counter.

Inside Left is Maradona's preferred location and with Davids behind, even Keane will find that one a tough job to take on all through the match.
 
Had to change my vote reluctantly.

Schuster-Maradona is a brilliant and proven partnership. Blohkin and Elkjaer are brilliant cast who can drag and open spaces for Diego to have his best game. All in all one of the best builds around Diego.

I think harms has enough solidity to hold up Indnyc's attack and score on the counter.

Inside Left is Maradona's preferred location and with Davids behind, even Keane will find that one a tough job to take on all through the match.

So is Law - Charlton - Best; Keane and Giggs; :)

Also, Keane will have Cafu for company to manage the to the right
 
Schuster-Maradona is a brilliant and proven partnership.

Wouldn’t call the partnership brilliant to be honest, that sounds like a massive overstatement (particularly in the context of the Holy Trinity being on the pitch).

Schuster and Maradona didn’t win anything of note, and from what I recall it was only when Diego left that you really saw the best of Schuster as a dominant force.
 
Best, Law and Charlton having played together does give the team additional synergy. There is no question of super stars fitting together.





 
Think it’s the first time we’ve had the Holy Trinity in these drafts - with Giggs as well to boot. It’s definitely lacking a GOAT centre back but the rest of the side looks fantastic - and the partnerships make it even more than the sum of its parts.

Hard to look past Maradona, but if there’s one man capable of raising his game to snuff him out it would be Roy Keane.

If Van Bommel can take care of Diego then so can Keano. :)

Even with Diego, indync mf 3 is better for me. Charlton is exactly the kind of 10 you want on top of your MF 2 against Maradona.
 
harms couldn't upgrade much due to finishing in Ukraine but Indnyc really solidified that 4-3-3.

To me he has an upper hand on the flanks and that Edwards, Keano, Sir Bobby core would negate the effect of Maradona and limit his influence on the game.

That 4-3-3 has what it takes to break the 5-3-2 harms assembled if they get the grip of the game.
 
harms couldn't upgrade much due to finishing in Ukraine but Indnyc really solidified that 4-3-3.

To me he has an upper hand on the flanks and that Edwards, Keano, Sir Bobby core would negate the effect of Maradona and limit his influence on the game.

That 4-3-3 has what it takes to break the 5-3-2 harms assembled if they get the grip of the game.

Does he? Brehme Maldini is the best duo you can have to neutralise best and cafu and amoros against giggs is an even match.
 
Does he? Brehme Maldini is the best duo you can have to neutralise best and cafu and amoros against Giggs is an even match.
5-3-2 is often seen in drafts as the best possible formation as it won't expose uber attacking full backs and seems that the LCB and RCB are always able to cover both wide and centrally.

To me Sir Bobby would have a great effect in the final third in this set up and him and Law both have to be minded by the CB's, whilst having Maldini or Shesternyov cover the flanks constantly will open up spaces centrally for them or isolate them one on one with Figueroa or the spare CB.

To me the game looks like Indnyc dominating and harms looking for counters with the former creating a bit more chances.

Not really sold on Elkjaer/Blokhin up top to be honest. Blokhin is a great foil for Maradona, but not sure what Elkjaer brings to the table and to be honest I've never been a big fan of him.
 
Not really sold on Elkjaer/Blokhin up top to be honest. Blokhin is a great foil for Maradona, but not sure what Elkjaer brings to the table and to be honest I've never been a big fan of him.
Considering that you probably know how he played, I'm not sure if I can even add anything... weird, as he's the perfect fit for him in my book.
 
Schuster and Maradona didn’t win anything of note, and from what I recall it was only when Diego left that you really saw the best of Schuster as a dominant force.
I thought about making a video, but that would've taken too much time. But they've had a beautiful synergy, scoring and assisting each other for fun.
 
in games like this its impossible to vote, two great teams.
This dilemma is easily solved — look at the difference in the goalkeeper's quality. One
  • won Ballon d'Or
  • conceded just six goals in 27 Russian league games
  • kept 22 clean sheets in the league
  • provided a historical performance at Wembley (ask Charlton and Law, they were there)
  • scared Sandro Mazzola shitless before saving his penalty

Sandro Mazzola said:
Yashin can play football better than me


The other is Fillol.
 
For example, @Theon. They really had a great understanding of one another, and it was surprisingly equal — Maradona assisted tons of Schuster's goals. It's just a few examples, there are much more of them, obviously.






 
Last edited:
Considering that you probably know how he played, I'm not sure if I can even add anything... weird, as he's the perfect fit for him in my book.
For Argentina in 86, Maradona was more of a second striker rather than a midfielder and at Napoli you had Careca as the all rounded striker and Carnevale with bigger presence in the box and excellent in the air. With Blokhin already in I'd probably have a stronger striker next to him (ala Batistuta) who can bring them both in play, be a threat in the air and also draw the opposition defenders making space for Blokhin and Maradona, rather than another forward that drops deep.

You have a great team in transition and that's one of your biggest strengths but IMO you need to keep the ball on the ground in a congested space whilst also Indnyc has a very good spine to clog the space in the middle.

If you had set up in possession then I can understand the rationale behind both Blokhin and Elkjaer, but on a counter I'd rather have someone to bring the ball down when you quickly initiate counters from the back.
 
For Argentina in 86, Maradona was more of a second striker rather than a midfielder and at Napoli you had Careca as the all rounded striker and Carnevale with bigger presence in the box and excellent in the air. With Blokhin already in I'd probably have a stronger striker next to him (ala Batistuta) who can bring them both in play, be a threat in the air and also draw the opposition defenders making space for Blokhin and Maradona, rather than another forward that drops deep.
I'm afraid that you haven't seen that much of him, going by your description.

I'd take Elkjær over Batistuta for
  • bringing them both in play
  • especially for drawing the opposition defenders to make space for Blokhin and Maradona, I mean I can't think of a striker who does that better than Elkjær
Rather than dropping deep Elkjær more often peeled out wide (to both sides), same is true for Blokhin, so Maradona has plenty of space to run forward. I'd give Batistuta his superior aerial ability (and long distance shots while we're at it), although Elkjær scored lots of headers. I had an option of picking Batigol early, but opted for Elkjær because he is a much better fit. He lead the line for Denmark with the likes of Laudrup playing as a second striker, and did it brilliantly; plus he was strong as a bull, although surprisingly mobile for someone his size.

Joga's compilation focuses a lot on his off the ball movement (I assume that everyone is already tired of my compilation vs Uruguay):
 
This dilemma is easily solved — look at the difference in the goalkeeper's quality. One
  • won Ballon d'Or
  • conceded just six goals in 27 Russian league games
  • kept 22 clean sheets in the league
  • provided a historical performance at Wembley (ask Charlton and Law, they were there)
  • scared Sandro Mazzola shitless before saving his penalty
The other is Fillol.

You make it sound like Fillol is a sheep.. Sure Yashin is great but Fillol was no mug either..
 
You make it sound like Fillol is a sheep.. Sure Yashin is great but Fillol was no mug either..
Nope, I made Fillol sound like Fillol. A very good keeper, but I have the best one ever, and we all know how much can a keeper do, De Gea have been keeping us afloat for years now. It's like if I've had Maradona and you've had Bochini as your number #10.

The psychological factor is huge — there was a research that strikers took less shots against Yashin because they knew that he'll definitely save the weak ones. Mazzola spoke about the fear factor he felt when he took that penalty — and unsurprisingly, he bottled it. Eduard Streltsov was famous for creative use of his backheels — passes, shots, everything. He first tried it when they've played Dynamo Moscow and all predictable, normal moves didn't work, Yashin saved them all.
 
I'm going to leave it here before going off as it's my currently favourite Maradona compilation with lots of rare footage. The guy was something else.

 
I'm afraid that you haven't seen that much of him, going by your description.

I'd take Elkjær over Batistuta for
  • bringing them both in play
  • especially for drawing the opposition defenders to make space for Blokhin and Maradona, I mean I can't think of a striker who does that better than Elkjær
Rather than dropping deep Elkjær more often peeled out wide (to both sides), same is true for Blokhin, so Maradona has plenty of space to run forward. I'd give Batistuta his superior aerial ability (and long distance shots while we're at it), although Elkjær scored lots of headers. I had an option of picking Batigol early, but opted for Elkjær because he is a much better fit. He lead the line for Denmark with the likes of Laudrup playing as a second striker, and did it brilliantly; plus he was strong as a bull, although surprisingly mobile for someone his size.

Joga's compilation focuses a lot on his off the ball movement (I assume that everyone is already tired of my compilation vs Uruguay):



My point was bringing them both in play in terms of focal point when you are defending and engaging opposition defenders around the box rather than running into space and pulling them wide. You have Blokhin for that and having them both it's better in a possession oriented system when you can have both him and Blokhin pressing high and also joining in the midfield when off the ball to win the ball back. I've seen Elkjaer play for Denmark mostly and he is a complete striker that you describe him, but he played in a much different Denmark set up - an exciting and technical unit that demolished a pretty rough Uruguay side in 86.

In your video above is what I mean by dropping deep(not necessarily centrally but as you said mostly wide), he created space, but often you can see Denmark attack with numbers and have 4-5 players around the box. He was lean and could hold his own against challenges sure, but his biggest strength was his movement rather than occupying the space around the box - something I usually associate a more defensive minded 5-3-2.

He had an enormous energy, despite being a chain smoker, but again think you misinterpreted my post in terms of drawing defenders to him, bring the ball down and get Blokhin/Maradona into play.

The style you are describing is more of a direct play that you have with the Danish Dynamite in the early 80's where they moved the ball quickly on the floor, which was different to what Napoli or Argentina employed considering the team build around Maradona.

Of course I might be missing something here, but I'm more interested in your general approach to the game and how they both will work around Maradona.
 
The style you are describing is more of a direct play that you have with the Danish Dynamite in the early 80's where they moved the ball quickly on the floor, which was different to what Napoli or Argentina employed considering the team build around Maradona.

Of course I might be missing something here, but I'm more interested in your general approach to the game and how they both will work around Maradona.
I'm going to have more possession here, especially with Schuster orchestrating from the deep (something that neither of Indnyc's defensive midfielders can do), although of course this would be a very direct system. Figueroa's skill on the ball should not be underappreciated as well. Keane and Edwards were to slouches, but my midfield is more gifted on the ball.

Both Blokhin and Elkjær are going to be pressing Indnyc's defence (as is his natural game), and my front trio is completely interchangeable, with Maradona being the catalyst to any move. If he wasn't to make a run centrally, someone will pull out wide; both are fantastic partners for a one-two. I don't think that Maradona needs a classic target man, someone like Elkjær is more than enough.

Schuster is a wild card, his goalscoring stats for Barcelona are incredible — 106 in 295 games as a central (not attacking) midfielder. I've made only one compilation of him (2 assists and a generally flawless performance in El Clasico), but I've had a few others planned in mind. Few in the history of this game managed to maintain such level of creativity and goalscoring from such deep position. He reminds me of Pogba at his best.

This side does not play like Argentina or Napoli though, he has much better partners here than he ever had (in all the lines), and the football will be much more diverse and creative.
 
I'm going to have more possession here, especially with Schuster orchestrating from the deep (something that neither of Indnyc's defensive midfielders can do), although of course this would be a very direct system. Figueroa's skill on the ball should not be underappreciated as well. Keane and Edwards were to slouches, but my midfield is more gifted on the ball.

Both Blokhin and Elkjær are going to be pressing Indnyc's defence (as is his natural game), and my front trio is completely interchangeable, with Maradona being the catalyst to any move. If he wasn't to make a run centrally, someone will pull out wide; both are fantastic partners for a one-two. I don't think that Maradona needs a classic target man, someone like Elkjær is more than enough.

Schuster is a wild card, his goalscoring stats for Barcelona are incredible — 106 in 295 games as a central (not attacking) midfielder. I've made only one compilation of him (2 assists and a generally flawless performance in El Clasico), but I've had a few others planned in mind. Few in the history of this game managed to maintain such level of creativity and goalscoring from such deep position. He reminds me of Pogba at his best.

This side does not play like Argentina or Napoli though, he has much better partners here than he ever had (in all the lines), and the football will be much more diverse and creative.

That's the key here IMO.

You have the players to press high and get the ball back quickly when you are dispossessed .

From what I've read so far tho you are basing the team on incredible defence, using Blokhin's pace and Schuster orchestrating from deep in a sense that he launches quick counters into space, which he is perfectly capable of doing of course.

What IMO is the best interpretation of your formation is something like this:


--------Blokhin------Elkjaer-------
--------------Maradona-----------
--Brehme----Davids----Schuster---Amoros
------Maldini---Shesternyov---Figueroa----

I'd probably have Figueroa covering for that right flank and keep Shesternyov central.

A sort of 3-4-1-2 where both Blokhin/Elkjaer press high (both are really accustomed for it being Lobanovskyi disciple and Elkjaer's style), your midfield presses the opposition trying to get the ball back and limit their option on distributing the ball on the flanks, where Indnyc has advantage.

This is another proposition than the one I read from the OP and how the midfield battle will go on. From reading up the thread I expected a direct game from both sides where Indnyc would dominate the game, whilst your side sitting back and waiting for opportunity on a counter - where a more of a target man makes more sense compared to someone like Elkjaer - a stronger, better in the air, having the ability to fend off defenders and play on the shoulder of the defence and near the opposition box.
 
If Van Bommel can take care of Diego then so can Keano. :)
They key was Beckenbauer, not van Bommel though. And a set up that limited Maradona to the central areas (with the likes of Garrincha in the team as well). Here he is free to roam around and the front 2 will adjust to his movement, while neither one of the opposition's center backs would be able to do a Kaiser and stop him.
 
Duncan Edwards has a lot of creativity.. He was incredibly versatile.. Here is a good clip of him

 
For me the game went to Indy for 2 reasons

1. The hardworking Giggs/Charlton/Law trio to complement and help the excellent Keane and Edwards base. Exactly what you need against Maradona. Also, like I mentioned in the first game, don't rate Schuster's defensive side which makes it very easy for the United boys to boss the midfield.

2. The 2 on 1 threat on the wings should significantly cut the wings of the wingbacks on harms' side. While it's true that Brehme and Maldini is what you need against Best, it's also true that Best and Cafu is of the level you need to break Maldini/Brehme.

Unlike few others, wasn't that difficult a choice to make for me. Hardly ever happens when you are facing Maradona, so all credits to Indy there.