I do agree with you on the whole, but because they never actually proved themselves in these new-fangled formations its certainly legitimate to ask searching questions as to their suitability. I know you've pretty much said likewise in the first paragraph, but it bares repeating. This is very much going into contentious territory that we only skirted around in our match, but given the lack of footage in many instances and the lack of opportunity to prove themselves on a properly international stage, its asking alot to just assume that some of the older names are as good or as suitable to their roles as the known quantities.
All time British/Irish fantasy draft, Q-F: Edgar Vs Annah
- Thread starter Chesterlestreet
- Start date
The more you try to portray them as complete, the more they sound like a bunch of spackers. It simply didn't work that way if they were any good, and those who did that were largely responsible for the basketball scorelines and ridiculous scoring records some of the forwards from that era can boast. I can't recall a single time I saw Nassazi or Da Guia in no man's land, it was the outside halfbacks who had certain latitude to be all over the shop/covering gaps, but never the central fullbacks. They were the last line of defence indeed: in the box.
As far as this match specifically, Annah's overemphasised the counter-attacking tactic but he's clarified it since then. I have serious problems rating most of his defensive line for the reasons stated above. I couldn't agree any less with the Keane criticisms he's been presented with though - he's perfect for quick transitions from defence to the wingers. On EAP's part, I don't like Gemmill being reduced to a largely defensive role, necessary as it may be. From games I've watched of that era, he was one of the first truly effective attacking full backs I've noticed. The lack of goal threat is a serious concern as well.
On Bill Slater:
He started off as a Inside Left, then moved to Left Back and finally got settled as left sided Half back. I would say a left HB is his proper position. He can utilize both his defensive and offensive prior position to the best. Utilizing him in a pivot (which I think is a very specialized role..and that is what Annah needs) where he will be operating on equal amounts on the right, is what makes me sceptical. Left sided holding midfielder in a 4-2-3-1 seems his perfect matching role in modern formations.
On Danny Blanchflower:
A 4-3-3 formation traditionally has 3 CM's, the middle in a holding role and other 2 doing a box-to-box role bridging the midfield and offence. The holding player breaks up opposition attacks and two CM's need to be physically able to shuttle to and fro all through the match as they have split responsibilities at both ends.
Here we have Slater playinng the holding role, so it stands that other two must be box-to-box. Else it becomes unbalanced. Considering both Blanchflower and Slater operating deep, then we only have Keane operating in the wrong side to shuttle and that will be too much even for him.
Agree on all counts.
1) I have a hard time seeing how a random assortment of defenders can live with the creativity EAPs midfield has to offer. There's not many goals in him, but the ability to unlock defences is certainly there, and I'm not even sure there's much locking to undo.
2) Keane is absolutely fine, and the whole box-to-box stuff with the other two is bizarre. There's a much more obvious issue in that the way that midfield has been deployed Annah's strongest flank defensively is EAPs weakest, and viceversa. Unnecessary though, I've no idea why he doesn't just swap Keane and Blanchflower.
3) Gemmell's attacking contribution is important, absolutely, particularly given the above (no real RB and Blanchflower on that side trying to contain Scholes and Brady).
I can't say I agree with any of that. It's far to formulaic for my taste. You don't have to field two box-to-box to players in a 4-3-3 formation. If Annah states that Blanchflower will operate as a playmaker, you have to consider him as a playmaker and argue from there - not from the assertion that he HAS to play with two box-to-boxers according to a principle he clearly doesn't recognize (and why should he?)
Totally disagree on this.
1) With me having bulk possession, how will you have the initiative?
2) The inference that possession is due to lack of flair is just bizarre. Do you think possession based teams play that way due to lack of flair?
3) With a world class Scholes, Brady's golden left food and England's best AM in Gazza plus McManaman, how can I lack flair? It is one think I consider myself to be in abundance.
I think you may have a point on Slater, not in that he can't do that holding role, but in that he wouldn't be anything to write home about. The more I read the more non-plussed I am about him.
Disagree on the whole 4-3-3/Blanchflower unbalance stuff. Yeah, you would usually have two box-to-box, but it isn't a big deal really. It's just less potent when it comes to supporting the attack, but Blanchflower's passing makes for an acceptable trade-off, particularly if he is sitting deep and countering.
This is fair, I don't disagree at all. The risk you're running fielding old timers/obscure players is that people won't acknowledge them - and rightly so if you can't convince them of their qualities.
It's impossible to show of a bunch of YouTube vids of 'em, though - so all you can do is point to how they were rated by their contemporaries and football historians. There really isn't much else you can do - and if people don't buy it, you're fecked. Name of the game.
My main point is this: If it should be held against a player that he never featured in a modern formation, we might as well scrap the idea of drafting players from a certain era altogether, because all anyone has to do by way of argumentation is to say: "But he can't play in a 4-2-3-1". End of debate, game over.
Agreed on all bar the bolded. I have no real problem with how he's lined up his midfield - I'm going purely off memory here but a slight majority of Keane's goals that I remember come from a burst from left midfield. If, and I'm sure you can see the problem here, Slater is so competent and maybe better suited to covering the right side, I can see how he'd press on the right and Blanchflower would tend to drop more centrally. Of course that frees up Gazza a wee bit at the expense of Brady, which might just be worth it.
That was never my point. I was quite specific on Slater, saying he is not suited to that particular role he is being played in this game. My opinion. Never said he will be useless in modern formations.
In fact it is the vice versa that is happening here. Left sided players playing right, Keane playing left and yet, voilà, everybody is at their peak powers. Add up the niggles, and you pretty much have a non-peak team.
To stretch the argument, it would be the Giggs effect. Giggs tearing up the left middle would have far more effect in freeing up Keane, than Best in this advanced role.
I love the way the underrating of McManaman shines through. What the feck else can the guy do other than being the most successful British export ever (more so than John Charles).
I agree it's a strange point to make. I think your midfield has more creativity and his does indeed have a bit more flair, albeit rather concentrated. That's precisely why I don't get the acccepting you will have the initiative thing, unless it's a deliberate "he can't score anyway" backhanded compliment. Your midfield is the last midfield I would want to hand over the initiative to, precisely because it can untangle a parked bus (although apparently it's a bus, but it isn't parked). In the meantime, handing over the intiative isolates Best and paints a giant bullls-eye on him upon recovery, which is exactly how I would want things against Best with your defence and Nobby holding.
Wasn't directed specifically at you, nor at the Slater issue - it's a general point.
You're an unreasonably reasonable man, my fellow drunkard
.As always, the ending of the draft games will be inherently unsatisfactory as the games will never be played. I guess the fun is in the drafting and the debate - personally Skizzo and I have decided that one era deserves more weight according to the available evidence, others think otherwise. We argue the bit out and see what some anoymous voters decide
.I disagree in terms of Keane's main role - he's going to get the ball to the feet of any left winger he plays alongside, and Best on the left wing will be an easier pass than to Giggs running between your full back and centre back.
There's a halfway house though.
I've fielded José Leandro Andrade as a rightback before, when he was a right halfback. That stands to reason. Nasazzi/Da guia as CBs, that makes sense to me. I've seen various oldies in different drafts being deployed in roles which, largely, were the same or almost the same as what they played.
The issue here is you are presented with:
Leftback --- Left fullback in a three --- Left fullback in a three --- Right fullback in a two
and expected to see that as a functional back four. I can't really see that happening, it literally defies belief. Yes, Annah needed to spend 10M a head (his own doing) but he could easily pick someone like Colin Hendry or Gio's favourite Giggs-pocketer at RB.
Tactical Flexibility during Counters:
Annah is playing a direct attacking style. If he loses possession during an attack, my counter will be far swifter and has better chance at scoring.
With Keane being the only player moving up supporting the attack, McManaman will be perfectly placed to exploit the space behind. A quick pass by Scholes will have Brady moving to AM and Gazza moving up interfering both Slater and the CB. The one touch pass between them would definitely result in a goal. Not much chances of Hughes getting caught upfront alone.
Annah is playing a direct attacking style. If he loses possession during an attack, my counter will be far swifter and has better chance at scoring.
With Keane being the only player moving up supporting the attack, McManaman will be perfectly placed to exploit the space behind. A quick pass by Scholes will have Brady moving to AM and Gazza moving up interfering both Slater and the CB. The one touch pass between them would definitely result in a goal. Not much chances of Hughes getting caught upfront alone.
I see how it is more balanced when getting the ball and using it. That said, my last concern would be optimising Keane's goalscoring potential when the other side has the initiative (by Annah's own admission) and has so much going on on my right flank.
Tactical Flexibility during Counters:
Annah is playing a direct attacking style. If he loses possession during an attack, my counter will be far swifter and has better chance at scoring.
With Keane being the only player moving up supporting the attack, McManaman will be perfectly placed to exploit the space behind. A quick pass by Scholes will have Brady moving to AM and Gazza moving up interfering both Slater and the CB. The one touch pass between them would definitely result in a goal. Not much chances of Hughes getting caught upfront alone.
OK
He played as a right half (see the formation I posted on the first page) for Wolves. That was his main position - with Ron Flowers at left half. He played as an inside forward as a youngster and he played at fullback for England (but also as a half) and later in his Wolves career (after Wright had stepped down).
I can't stop laughing at that picture.
Reminds me of so many similar exchanges I've had before. "No, your man is here, and mine is there, and all your chaps magically decide to be retards, and next thing you know I have a 4 vs 1 on your CB"
Reminds me of so many similar exchanges I've had before. "No, your man is here, and mine is there, and all your chaps magically decide to be retards, and next thing you know I have a 4 vs 1 on your CB"
This is where I see the opposite of Chester's worry occuring - pick a random defender, claim he's quick, strong and tactically aware, present no evidence whatsoever, yet he's a tier above the likes of Hendry and he'd have no problems with Michael Owen, never mind a Shearer or Law. Ultimately, and I admit our own drafting reflects this, this is where I have a tough time with the oldies. It was always going to be the contentious aspect of this draft though, and there's no evidence that its decisively advantaged anyone. So all players get their day in the sun, and its in the voters hands as to who they favour.
Indeed. That's for Annah to debate on, though - I ain't going there. What I've said all along is that you have to demonstrate that your man is a plausible choice for the part.
True, its relying alot on a seemless interchange existing between Blanchflower and Slater that probably isn't realistic in the circumstances. It might be a tough ask for Annah to do given EAP's attacking midfielders, but maybe Blanchflower in the Pirlo/quarter back role with Keane and Slater flanking him might have been the best way to set up.
Tactical Flexibility during Counters:
Annah is playing a direct attacking style. If he loses possession during an attack, my counter will be far swifter and has better chance at scoring.
With Keane being the only player moving up supporting the attack, McManaman will be perfectly placed to exploit the space behind. A quick pass by Scholes will have Brady moving to AM and Gazza moving up interfering both Slater and the CB. The one touch pass between them would definitely result in a goal. Not much chances of Hughes getting caught upfront alone.
Annah's main worry is that his attacking trio could get isolated and not get enough support/runs to create sufficient disorder in Edgar's ranks. It's Best, though - and it's unrealistic to shut him up completely. But he can't be relied on to win the match on his own.
I can see how it will be absolutely necessary for Keane to contribute offensively here - and with that comes certain questions (as others have mentioned already).
My main gripe with Edgar's side is that it doesn't scream goals. The latter is also - of course - a question of how one regards/rates Annah's defence.
I can see how it will be absolutely necessary for Keane to contribute offensively here - and with that comes certain questions (as others have mentioned already).
My main gripe with Edgar's side is that it doesn't scream goals. The latter is also - of course - a question of how one regards/rates Annah's defence.
Went for EAP, was convinced I will be voting for annah when the match was announced but his in-thread comments won it for me. Tactically much better and did well to expose annah's defense.
People are really underrating Stanley Matthews here. He made completely dominated and created 4 goals in one match against him. But Gemmell is expected to keep him in his pocket here?
With wingers like Best and Stanley you just need them to get the ball at their feet and they excelled not only when they had the ball but at finding the space to receive it. Both are the type to drop deep to receive it and Gemmell and Cohen would be beaten several times over the course of a game. With Best and Mortensens movement I have a brilliant fluid attack with loads of pace and the two top scorers as well.
There won't be a massive 20 metre difference between the forward lines and the midfielders - they'll be tight together(again think Real Madrid) and the wingers and forwards connect brilliantly with the midfield.
I still don't think I am giving away any sort of initiative here. With leaders like Blanch and Keane and defensively brilliant hard working players through out apart from Best I will clearly have a team that is very strong at winning the ball back.
When I do Keane and Blanchflower are a brilliant short passer next to someone with an unlimited passing range. Slater is as well more than capable at the ball playing part of a defensive midfielder.
I don't get how Keane-Blanch with Slater in front of some of the best British defenders of all time can be considered incapable of winning the ball back. Especially with Mortensen and Matthews being really good at participating in that phase of the game as well.
Yes my opponent will have possession as a result of having 5 strong possession midfielders on the pitch and no goalscorers or real route to goal. My route is much more direct and it can be expected that Matthews, Mortensen and Best have the quality to break through the opponents lines and create a goal much faster.
My right side is as good if not better than my left. I have Matthews there who was a brilliant team player who worked hard for his side, Blanchflower who was a right wing half with a defensive right(centre) back in McCracken.
On the left Keane makes up for Best and Sansom being offensively oriented. Slater won't be stuck in the centre of the pitch either, when the ball is on the left side of the pitch Slater and Keane will be on the left side with Blanch more centrally.
When the ball is on the right then the team will shift over like they always do to cut down space. So Slater, and Keane for that matter will be helping out Blanchflower on the right too.
You do realize this means a diagonal pass will leave your side expose?
By looking at it, i can see Anna edges in wing play where as Eap got recognized pair at defense.It all comes to the MF,where EAP got slight edge with creativity of Scholes/Liam/Gazza.I love the Work rate of Keane&Blatchflower but it all comes to the mix of Work rate and creativity and i'm giving it to EAP.
This is the crux of it really, and I'm having a bastard of a time trying to decide.
Tactical Flexibility during Counters:
Annah is playing a direct attacking style. If he loses possession during an attack, my counter will be far swifter and has better chance at scoring.
With Keane being the only player moving up supporting the attack, McManaman will be perfectly placed to exploit the space behind. A quick pass by Scholes will have Brady moving to AM and Gazza moving up interfering both Slater and the CB. The one touch pass between them would definitely result in a goal. Not much chances of Hughes getting caught upfront alone.
- The role of a modern full back simply did not exist in 2-3-5 and WM days.
- A full back in a 2-3-5/WM days translates into a CB who is comfortable drifting wide, a la RCB or LCB. They simply did not have the same skill set requirement as a modern full back.
- The closest you can get to FB position is a right/left half back which I would presume dropped back into modern wing back position in new formations.
Hardwick is best suited to a left sided CB (back 4) or a LCB (back 3). Similarly McCracken is a modern right sided CB (back 4) or a RCB (back 3). Neither are best suited to the role they are playing here.
If you look at top 3 defenders on the pitch, it would be McGrath, Hughes and Gemmell. Followed by Cohen.
- A full back in a 2-3-5/WM days translates into a CB who is comfortable drifting wide, a la RCB or LCB. They simply did not have the same skill set requirement as a modern full back.
- The closest you can get to FB position is a right/left half back which I would presume dropped back into modern wing back position in new formations.
Hardwick is best suited to a left sided CB (back 4) or a LCB (back 3). Similarly McCracken is a modern right sided CB (back 4) or a RCB (back 3). Neither are best suited to the role they are playing here.
If you look at top 3 defenders on the pitch, it would be McGrath, Hughes and Gemmell. Followed by Cohen.
I've not seen Slater, but from what I've seen of Gazza, he is hard to shut down. Gazza's movement and workrate will try to pull Slater out of position and I would like to think he will have his chances against Slater here.
I mentioned in Page 1 on the gap between his midfield and offence. Despite presence of Keane, I think it is too wide a bridge to be covered throughout the game. He will have his occasions, I give you, but I'll dominate possession and the midfield.
Given possession (as Annah admitted), my attack has the capability to unlock most defences. And Annah's mismatched back 4 just makes it a tad easier. All I need is first goal. Then he needs to commit more and more forward to equalize and that exposes his middle further.
Last edited:
Can't dispute with that. He was a solid and uber aggressive defender who would try to support attack as much as he can. I've not stopped him from doing that but since he is up against WC wingers, he is just tasked to concentrate more on defensive side.
Here he is just up against Blanchflower who is operating deeper. I see no reason for him not to move up bit when we have possession. He can easily get the ball out of defence and move the ball to midfield without much opposition here.
I think Annah handing over the initiative has been overplayed to say the least. He must have been aware that his side is more than capable going head on against EAP side with the best attack in this draft and a great midfield which consists of the best box to box in the draft and one of the best playmakers as well.
That would have made for a more even game. However his current tactics give him a better chance against EAP's set up imo at least.
How will Gemmell and Cohen cope against Matthews and Best here? Always regarded them as excellent attacking full backs but not the greatest defensively. Pretty sure that some will regard them as being able to hold their own against Matthews and Best, not me
Brady can play on the wings but is that his best position?
Annah's defense needs clarifying but I reckon he's certainly got more goals, more joy from the wings and EAP lacks a top goalscorer and it doesn't seem like he's got too many goals in his side as well. Gone for Annah.
I guess people's preferences will also come into play here. Annah's direct style with great wing play vs EAP great technical side with great midfield passers capable of playing excellent possession football. Just lacks a bit of penetration and goals imo. Both aren't extreme sides with exclusive styles of play mind.
That would have made for a more even game. However his current tactics give him a better chance against EAP's set up imo at least.
How will Gemmell and Cohen cope against Matthews and Best here? Always regarded them as excellent attacking full backs but not the greatest defensively. Pretty sure that some will regard them as being able to hold their own against Matthews and Best, not me
Brady can play on the wings but is that his best position?
Annah's defense needs clarifying but I reckon he's certainly got more goals, more joy from the wings and EAP lacks a top goalscorer and it doesn't seem like he's got too many goals in his side as well. Gone for Annah.
I guess people's preferences will also come into play here. Annah's direct style with great wing play vs EAP great technical side with great midfield passers capable of playing excellent possession football. Just lacks a bit of penetration and goals imo. Both aren't extreme sides with exclusive styles of play mind.
Yeah, it seems like it's one of those games were a small comment is completely blown out of proportion and interpreted in a very extreme way again and again. It doesn't matter how often Annah repeats that it's not how he set up his team, it goes back to others telling him how his team plays and how it leads to significant flaws, which obviously aren't there if you don't make them up. It's a bit silly in my opinion.
Aye, I can't fault you at all for emphasising his defensive skills given the calibre of winger he's up against. And from what I've seen I agree that he's good enough to pick his moments to get forward.
I agree with Joga and Balu that Annah's level of detail in terms of his tactical descriptions is maybe working against him here. Personally, I have no trouble at all imagining his midfield and attack functioning cohesively. It all comes down to that defensive unit.