Retro Fantasy Semi-Final 1 Team Brwned vs Team Polaroid

Polaroid

Why would I need to ask Brwned?
Your words speak for themselves
You could learn from Brwned on how to make a reasoned analysis though

TheReligion

As I have been his assistant throughout so he knows how I operate.

When your team is getting beat by such a handsome margin reason goes out of the window to some degree

antohan

He takes it waaaay too seriously and gets very wound up.

The remarkable thing is the gap has widened significantly, which either points to people agreeing or the bumps attracting more people who have never seen Stojkovic or Savicevic play.

That aside, the Laudrup clips were a masterstroke, no doubt. I haven't seen them but don't need to, what a player he was...

TheReligion

Agree with this

Polaroid

What do you mean imaginary floating stuff? you have not seen players in a floating attacking midfield role before?

Why would Brwned's team be getting more of the ball?
Are Laudrup and Haessler not playing in midfield?
It is Redondo-Rijkaard-Stojkovic against Matthaus-Effenberg-Laudrup-Haessler in the centre

You could list them, compare and explain why they are substantial or not substantial, instead of skirting around the issue and making a broad sweeping statement. I would like to hear how his bench is "streets ahead" of mine

How many games have you seen of Angloma and roughly when? a fair question to ask since you have basically asserted that these sports journalists were woefully misguided in their judgement

Also would be helpful if you could list all the right-backs in this competition that are better than Angloma and by how much

antohan

Yes I have, but I've never seen anyone play two of them if there's no ball for them to play with.

We've been here before, Laudrup and Haessler seem to be in midfield as much as Savicevic or Bergkamp for that matter.

I know, you've stated they are meant to float around but press Redondo when he has the ball. It's all very nice but I buy Stojkovic's support and offer of an immediate outlet more than that of your butterflies which are meant to roam yet suddenly be in the thick of it.

All four (Redondo, Rijkaard, Effenberg and Matthaus) were absolute monsters in midfield and it would be a close fight but I think Stojkovic's more disciplined supporting role tilts it.

I never said it was streets ahead. It's pretty obvious that with no relevance associated with injuries only Rai and Mauro Silva could be of any realistic use to you while all four of his subs could be handy for reasons other than injury. It's pretty simple really.

You want a lisht of fachts? Fuckin'ell, there was some truth in the Benitez comparison.

I have no idea how many times I say him but a fair few as I always followed the fortunes of a certain Enzo Francescoli, thus I took an interest in Marseille (more enduring as they were damn good) and Torino (for a shorter while as they were terrible). It is fair to say though that most of my memory will be based on the French team and Valencia though.

I've no idea what other right backs there are in this competition and frankly don't care. He is good, he is definitely not a weakness of yours, but he is no Cafu or Zanetti.

Pat_Mustard

I voted for Polaroid but there was very little in it for me. The midfield battle was dead even, but the Baresi-Maldini axis gave Polaroid the better defence imo. He has more variety and goals up front too in Suker and Weah.

Polaroid

How would there be no ball for them to play with?
Obviously you have not seen much of Brazil, it is not rare for them to play like this

We have here before and you did not reply when i said that Brwned is playing Savicevic on the right wing and Bergkamp as a second striker.
Why would they be in midfield as much as Laudrup and Haessler?

Of course they would be in the thick of it because the whole point of a floating role is to get to where the action is, doh!

Its 4 vs 3 in midfield, I have the advantage not only in numbers but also in quality. My team would dominate possession, and even after losing possession, I have the numerical advantage to double up and win the ball back, disrupting the opposition's rhythm in attempting to build from the back and at the same time be in a dangerous area to counter-attack. Brwned could have played Savicevic in midfield to level up the numbers but he was forced to shunt him to the right flank to patch up the relative weakness of Myung Bo who is facing Maldini.

I asked you whether TheReligion's point about his bench being streets ahead is valid and fair. You did not dispute it, even after i asked you a second time (see exchange below)

anyway, back to your point about his bench being far more handy since injuries are irrelevant

Earlier on, you posed a scenario where Weah got injured and you asked what i would do next

So now for the convenience of your argument, you say lets ignore injuries?

Putting that aside, why would Johnsen and Carboni be of no tactical use to me? As I said earlier, Johnsen could play in defense or midfield (in a holding role or with a man-marking brief). I could play him in centre defense alongside Walker, Baresi as libero and push Maldini, Angloma forward as wingbacks. Or i could detail Johnsen a man-marking job on Cantona. As for Carboni, he could come in at left-back, allowing Maldini to move to the centre partnering Baresi. How are Johnsen and Carboni not of tactical use to me?

Have you not thought of these?

I asked a fair question - How much have you seen of him and roughly when? what is all this rambling about fachts and Benitez? why are you getting so defensive as if it hit a raw nerve? looks like you lost it

sajeev

while the gap between the two teams is not much, Polariod's defence gives him an advantage, so voted for him.
this actually shows that even a little perceived advantage can give rise to a huge margin, when there is no ideological bias

antohan

Of course I haven't, we play them in Copa America and WCQ regularly and I lived there for 5 years but I never watched them.

If you pay any attention to Brazil you will have noticed that they win World Cups playing three defensive midfielders to ensure they get the ball. Once they get the ball it is irrelevant whether they have two floating men and a striker or the other way around.

The odd thing is Brazilians hate this, they call these players "cabezas de bagre" (bagre head, bagre being an ugly fish) and spend the entire tournament bitching about how boring it is to play that way (I lived in Rio in 2002).

But they then go on to win. Some coaches don't have Parreira's or Scolari's personality and buckle under the pressure to play fancy jogo bonito and all the fans favourite artists... and get duly stuffed as good as their "floaters" may be.

Bizarre that you bring Brazil up of all teams

They look to me as if they are in similar positions (support striker/hole/roaming between midfield and defensive line). That is once you allow for the fact Brwned spreads his players all the way up to goal while you have your strikers outside the box (which is where his support striker is, and I presume that's not what Weah and Suker are meant to be doing).

The whole point of a floating role is not to be in the thick of it, much the opposite. You give creative players with good movement a licence to roam so that they find openings and tie defensive lines into knots. In order to do that a player in a floating role should aim to be AWAY from the thick of it, not stuck to Fernando Redondo!

I don't know why it is so difficult to understand that if you sacrifice Haessler and play Silva instead you guarantee posession, Laudrup would be as influential as ever, if not more (given he now has no defensive duties whatsoever, I hope) and with better strikers and defenders this would be game over before it even started.

You just refuse to see it. You go into the game reiterating the exact same (great) team just taking on Baresi and not even bothering to study Brwned and how best to play him. That's what baffles me.

Rather than dispute it I qualified it, there was an element of truth in it but it depended on how you evaluate it. You seem to take everything in a rash black or white way, which I don't.

I ask you, do injuries count in this game? Are they supposed to happen? Do they have any bearing on people's votes? No, I didn't think so.

I asked you the Weah thing out of interest purely as the result was pretty much nailed on already and there was not much to keep things moving (which is important, see how many more people have actually voted here as opposed to the other semi).

It's not like I injured Canizares and everyone would start voting assuming Rai was now in goal. Innocuous.

They are of no use because there's no bloody point in you adding any defenders and the ones already there are better. And if you were to use Johnsen in midfield ahead of Silva you would be insane.

Of course there are an infinite number of options you could concoct, but they are of no real use, that's why I said in a game with no injuries to contend with they were of "no realistic use".

Are you serious? I am defensive? I lost it? Last time I checked most of us here are exchanging views and you are the one having a go at anyone daring to question your team in any shape or form.

Quick recap, to be read slowly:

• I made it clear your team is superior as far as the squad goes.
• I've said your defence is superb.
• I have no issue at all with Angloma other than him being portrayed as being at the same level as Cafu, Thuram and Zanetti. Furthermore, I said he was a good player and that Brwned's right back wasn't even a right back.
• I just point out you are unnecesarily leaving Brwned a chance of winning the game by not wrapping up the midfield battle and that Caboni and Johnsen are not much use in this scenario, which I believe are both fair points yet you keep coming back like an angry mare spitting and screaming at anyone not bowing before your team.

Hubris it is called.

Polaroid

Match over so I will not be wasting time replying to Antohan, people can judge for themselves, no hard feelings