Reserves Draft | Aldo Staine 14-6 EAP

[Moby]

He has Stiles/Hughes who both are capable of dropping back if needed ahead of him and

None of the dropping deep will happen when I am playing on the counter and inviting you to my side of the pitch. They will in contrast have to push up. I could have bought that argument if it was a deep compact defense defending as a unit but not in a gung-ho setup like yours which will be picked apart on the counter with several 1v1s taking place the whole game with acres of space behind to exploit.

Not to mention, the likes of Cubillas, Kempes and Elkjaer have more quality between them than those players can handle.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

The former has nothing more than a couple of games as the evidence and is against the twin-wing force of Amancio and Sagnol. I don't need to remind of Sagnol's overlapping prowess, do I?

The latter:

Again a BS argument. Kempes is not a winger and will not stretch the defence. He's likely to drop into the middle and Blind is more than sufficient there. Anyway with Kempes requiring to drop back and create more, Blind is more than sufficient.

 

[Moby]

And you are doing all this playing a deep line and me having a better midfield? Seriously?

With a clear domination in the middle, and your own defensive strategy, I fail to see how any of the defenders will be under consistent pressures. The counters will not be frequent as you think and they are well set up to handle this.

Anyway my point was that I do not plan to keep you out whole game. This is a attacking set-up I have and my point was I'll outscore you.

You need to realise the difference between playing on the counter and parking the bus. You have assumed I have done the latter, you have assumed I will hand you 70 odd percent of possession and you have assumed you will dominate the middle. Sorry, but that are all wrong assumptions. Bayern 12-13 played on the counter, Chelsea 11-12 parked the bus. Know the difference. It's not a defensive strategy, it's one that will exploit your unbalanced formation more than any other. You already have less defenders than you need at the back, with inviting them forward and knowing that my defense won't have any issue in keeping your attack out, I will do nothing but create even more spaces to exploit.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

None of the dropping deep will happen when I am playing on the counter and inviting you to my side of the pitch.

With 5 attackers ahead of them, can you think of 1 reason why Stiles or Hughes will be 'invited to your side of the pitch' Stiles will be covering Cubillas primarily (not man mark) and Hughes is competent to help out against Sagnol.

It's a crappy argument. They will not be stretched or caught on a counter.

Failed strategy!

 

[Moby]

He's likely to drop into the middle and Blind is more than sufficient there.

That's your opinion and I'll simply have to disagree there.

1. Blind is not good enough to keep Kempes out in a 1v1.
2. Blind hasnt played as a RB or a RCB which is his position here.
3. Blind isn't quick enough to catch Kempes once he's away on the counter.
4. Kempes is more than good enough to exploit the left side of the pitch, you don't need a touchline hugger, his movement and tireless attitude will drag Blind all over the place.
5. He has Cubillas in support who was equally at home on the left (ask @Gio who played him there in the 40s draft) and in the middle and would overload Blind.
6. Blind is fecked.

 

[Moby]

With 5 attackers ahead of them, can you think of 1 reason why Stiles or Hughes will be 'invited to your side of the pitch' Stiles will be covering Cubillas primarily (not man mark) and Hughes is competent to help out against Sagnol.

It's a crappy argument. They will not be stretched or caught on a counter.

Failed strategy!

I'll let other decide on what happens when teams play on the counter and invite the opposition. Not to mention your team will be absolutely disjointed with 5 players near your own goal and 5 players near mine. It makes no sense, but it's your job to argue for your team so fair play.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

It's not a defensive strategy, it's one that will exploit your unbalanced formation more than any other.

It is a defensive strategy. 'On the counter' means allowing your opponent the run of the play and possession and hitting back on the break. It is a given that you'll see less of the ball and need quick and accurate passing to get the ball up quickly (probably within 3 or 4 touches).

 

[Moby]

Also, who is providing width for your team? Everyone is playing centrally, the only source of any width whatsoever is Michel. Apart from that, no one from your midfield or defense is going to provide any width whatsoever.

Against a deep and compact defense such as mine that has shut down the middle of the park you need width to stretch it. All your players are going to occupy similar areas and stepping on each other's toes. Kenny, Cuelemans, Brady will all play infield.

 

[Moby]

When anto attempted a 2-3-5 in the past he always had two genuine wide players like Czibor if I remember correctly that didnt interfere with the inside forwards

Same thing is seen in most of the popular 2-3-5 setups where you have 'outside rights and lefts' to provide width and 'inside forwards' to attack the middle.
Who are your outside right and left?

 

[Moby]

It is a defensive strategy. 'On the counter' means allowing your opponent the run of the play and possession and hitting back on the break. It is a given that you'll see less of the ball and need quick and accurate passing to get the ball up quickly (probably within 3 or 4 touches).

That's such a stupid thing to say for a United fan.

We played on the counter for years with Ronaldo, Rooney, Tevez etc darting down the pitch. How much possession did we allow the opposition teams?

Again you keep assuming that you are Barca and I am Chelsea and this is 2012. After multiple clarifications, you keep on misleading the voters.

We will win possession back extremely quickly all over the pitch. In defense we have an animal like Vierchowod who is incredibly quick across the pitch and one of the greatest tacklers and defenders in the draft. You are assuming we are going to allow you to play your game and do nothing about it. Get off it. You are not keeping the ball for any long stretches in the game. We'll win it and attack with devastating force, quality and pace none of which your tactics or backline are capable of handling. And that will continue for the entire game.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Spent the last few minutes trying to get my head round how Edgar's team will play - particularly off the ball. In practice I can see the following:

• Hughes dropping into defence (as he has done successfully in the past) and it becoming a more conventional back four
• Blind able to sweep in from the right (as I don't really fancy Nadal's covering ability there)
• Andrade largely occupied with Amancio and offering enough defensive solidity to enable Brady to attack and not have to do the typical hard-running duties of the wide midfielder in a 352.
• Michel tracking Segarra's runs forward and vice versa: good wee battle that one. Michel swinging it into the onrushing Cuelemans though would be a fantastic route to goal.
• Stiles and Hughes killing that space in front of the back three to stifle Aldo/Stain's creativity

That all sounds quite reasonable. But feck me it took some head-scratching to get there.

Aldo/Stain's set-up is a lot more straightforward. Easier to understand and fairly logical. I'd swap Elkjaer and Kempes though, I'm not sure that would work as well it ought to. And I say that from experience having used the same pair wrongly in the past. That said the pair would naturally swap and be quite fluid in many ways. The other problem for Aldo/Stain is the lack of a genuine wide left threat to expose what looks to be a somewhat out of position Danny Blind. Unless EAP can convince me that he has strong credentials as a right-back. Yet in his current role dealing with Kempes and a floating Elkjaer and a bursting Cubillas, he looks fine and more akin to the sweepy stuff he did so well for Ajax. And because Blind can play fairly narrow, that enables Nadal to play a more compact game, which suits his physicality down to the ground.

But you got it nailed on pretty well.

Kempes is not a winger and he's likely to be in the middle more than out wide. Blind just needs to play wide CB and not a proper RB here. Something he's eminently capable of. It really is a narrow defence squeezing up space for his attack to flourish. Between Hughes and Andrade, I think we're equal to whatever Sagnol/Amancio can throw at us.

Neither Elkjaer nor Kempers are poachers in the box. Both are likely to drop deeper and run at my defence. I struggle to see how that actually plays out in a packed box.

An don't forget Dalglish and Rush.

 

[Moby]

Blind just needs to play wide CB and not a proper RB here. Something he's eminently capable of.

Prove it with evidence or a description of his skillset. When did he play as a wide CB in a back three, for example?

 

[Moby]

Blind just needs to play wide CB and not a proper RB here. Something he's eminently capable of.

Prove it with evidence or a description of his skillset. When did he play as a wide CB in a back three, for example?

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

That's such a stupid thing to say for a United fan.

We played on the counter for years with Ronaldo, Rooney, Tevez etc darting down the pitch. How much possession did we allow the opposition teams?

Do you recall United playing a deep line at defence + plus having a Dunga like player shielding them? United were good at counters, but we never actually played just for the counter. I don't recall us sitting deep any time during our peak.

 

[Moby]

Blind just needs to play wide CB and not a proper RB here. Something he's eminently capable of.

Prove it with evidence or a description of his skillset. When did he play as a wide CB in a back three, for example?

 

[Moby]

Do you recall United playing a deep line at defence + plus having a Dunga like player shielding them? United were good at counters, but we never actually played just for the counter. I don't recall us sitting deep any time during our peak.

So basically in your head the image of my defense is akin to a parking the bus Chelsea style?

Watch all the big games from 2007-09 and see how we set up. We sat deep and compact, but not fecking 10 men behind the ball. It was our defense and midfield winning the ball in our half of the pitch constantly and starting attacks.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Tbh, I don't it any different than...

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

So basically in your head the image of my defense is akin to a parking the bus Chelsea style?

Watch all the big games from 2007-09 and see how we set up. We sat deep and compact, but not fecking 10 men behind the ball. It was our defense and midfield winning the ball in our half of the pitch constantly and starting attacks.

What does playing a 'deep line' signify then? You are just trying to spin your strategy into something it is is not.

Can you explain how playing a deep line + counter attacking is not a defensive strategy?

And here you are arguing about my dominance in the midfield/possession.

 

[Moby]

@Edgar Allan Pillow can you answer the question please?
Who are the outside right and left in your team who provide genuine width in the usual 2-3-5 formations and are essential for a 5 man attack?

What are the credentials of Andrade on the left apart from a couple of games?

What are Blind's credentials as a wide CB against a wide forward?

I have pointed out multiple flaws in your team. All you have to say in return is how you are good enough to defend, good enough to win the midfield battle and good enough to score many goals without any tactical reasoning whatsoever.

Can you explain how Kenny and Rush will score multiple goals against Picchi and Vierchowod, when the former is absolutely in his element marshalling a compact defense like he did for years at Inter, while that is enough to outscore Kempes, Elkjaer, Amancio and Cubillas running at out of position defenders with acres of space behind them and outnumbered with you playing with an extra attacked and one defender less?

 

[Moby]

What does playing a 'deep line' signify then? You are just trying to spin your strategy into something it is is not.

Dude the position of the defense alone does not dictate a team's attacking philosophy.
I gave you a couple of examples already. You think Bayern 12-13 was a defensive team? They ripped teams apart 4-0s etc in big games while playing a deep backline. So did United against Arsenal in 2009 CL semi, for example. I have clarified this many times, maybe you need to understand better what playing on the counter means, and watch a few more examples. Spin what? From the start I have told you off on assuming that you will have a lion's share of possession or anything. You won't. You'll be lured into attacking the same space that is guarded by four or more players at all times and you will be hit back, time and again.

In any case, tactics aside, your defense is simply inferior to mine or do you disagree on that as well?

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

@Aldo

Moot point as I'm not playing a 2-3-5. Thought it was explicitly mentioned in OP and obvious when looking at my formation.

It is demonstrated that Andrade is not a weakness on the left. He's familiar with the role and has played it at highest levels. Don't really see why extended career outweighs actual performance? Don't mean to oversell antohan's comments...but as what best we have as a resident expert, his views support the role. If you think he's a weakness you have to do better and produce some information on why you think so.

Blind started his career at Right Back before moving to centre. He was a starting Right Back at Sparta.

Here's his profile at transfermarkt: http://www.transfermarkt.com/danny-blind/profil/spieler/101044
More listing his other positions RB: http://www.national-football-teams.com/player/14148/Danny_Blind.html

against Picchi and Vierchowod, when the former is absolutely in his element marshalling a compact defense

~ I really don't get it. You keep using compact defence, deep line, counter attack in your posts, yet somehow claim to match me in possession?
~ You have 1 DM and 1 AM with Szepan doing the suttling. Neither Amancio nor Kempes will help much in midfield battle...they will drop a bit but not proper midfielder.

I will dominate midfield and possession. Frankly don't see how you can argue otherwise.

 

[Physiocrat]

@Aldo What do you mean by support and automatic with your full backs?

 

[Moby]

Moot point as I'm not playing a 2-3-5. Thought it was explicitly mentioned in OP and obvious when looking at my formation.

Okay, who is providing the width to stretch the defense, in simplest words?

 

[Moby]

@Aldo What do you mean by support and automatic with your full backs?

FM terms!

Sagnol will support Amancio with his overlapping runs.
Segarra will assess the situation and act accordingly.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

@Aldo Just a position tweak. No subs. Can you update in OP?

 

[Balu]

What are Blind's credentials as a wide CB against a wide forward?

Didn't he play exactly that role in van Gaal's team before Rijkaard came back? Fairly certain he played rightback/right centerback in Ajax's UEFA Cup win in 1992?

 

[Gio]

@Balu @Edgar Allan Pillow It's reassuring to hear that Blind is credible in a right-sided role. The change is good though because that inter-shuttling of forward movement in AldoStain's trio requires a more cerebral presence as the last line of defence in Blind rather than Nadal.

 

[Physiocrat]

FM terms!

Sagnol will support Amancio with his overlapping runs.
Segarra will assess the situation and act accordingly.

I thought they were FM terms but I haven't properly played it since Champ Man 01/02.

Do you have a link to any FM terms with their definitions? If most are used to them I'll use them in my OP.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Okay, who is providing the width to stretch the defense, in simplest words?

The entire formation and strategy is based on wide midfield and not width. You have Brady and Michel who can drift wide if needed and overload the middle when necessary. It's the flexibility that gives me the advantage here.

 

[Moby]

Don't mean to oversell antohan's comments..

I quoted anto myself where he has alluded to Andrade being a right-back, it's there in this thread.

I will dominate midfield and possession. Frankly don't see how you can argue otherwise.

This is the last comment I am making on this. This isn't a parking the bus, this isn't surrendering the initiative, this isn't a players standing and watching you let do your thing. Not only do you not have the required tools to implement any such dominance in attack over my defenders you won't have the time or space to do anything like that. Deep doesn't mean 10 men camped inside in their own box. You'll lose the ball everytime you enter the central area of your final third, and pretty quickly at that. Going back to United, one of the greatest feature's of our team was the frequency at which we turned the possession around. Similar with most other counter attacking teams. We will not worry about keeping possession ourselves attacking in a fast and direct manner nor will we allow you to keep it. It;s basically win the ball - take it forward before any of your 'dropping into defense' players have a chance to be in position and attempt a goal. Rinse repeat. 90 minutes. No team will have a significant period of the game where they will enjoy a lot of possession. It will keep changing hands throughout the game. We will deal punches and we are way better equipped to take yours than you are to take ours. That gameplan suits our plan to a tee. If anything, we have the midfielders in Dunga and 'Beckenbauer before the war' (jk) who have the metronomic passing control to control the tempo and slow it down if we really want to, but we won't do that. You don't have any such midfielder nor do your or our tactics allow you to control the tempo. If you take any time longer than necessary you will lose it. If you go direct and go for goal instantly, you'll face a brick wall that is our defense. In contrast we have plenty of open highways leading to goal once we attack on the counter. It will be way too much for the likes of Nadal to sustain that for 90 minutes. We have the players with the desire in Elkjaer and Kempes who will be up and down the pitch the whole game and execute this strategy without breaking a sweat. We have the players interchanging that will not allow your defense to have a handle on ours at any point, given they are defending in 1v1s. And lastly, our defense is simply superior, even if you manage to conjure any sort of consistent pressure you will not break it down, but it is highly unlikely.

Enough have been said. Let the others comment instead of going in circles. And if you can, answer some questions. Mainly:
1. Where's your width?
2. How is your defense dealing with my attack better than mine is against yours?

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

@Balu @Edgar Allan Pillow It's reassuring to hear that Blind is credible in a right-sided role. The change is good though because that inter-shuttling of forward movement in AldoStain's trio requires a more cerebral presence as the last line of defence in Blind rather than Nadal.

It is necessary since Nadal seems quite underrated in this context. I had him as a solid capable defender. But again my terms versatility comes handy. Blind was a solid, dependable defender and a leader on the field. He was also a technically gifted and cultured player who could pass and strike the ball well for a non-attacking player. Sweeper in a back 3 is something he has done and consistently top of the game with Ajax.

 

[Enigma_87]

@Aldo Just a position tweak. No subs. Can you update in OP?

That's a lot better. I really don't rate Nadal at CB and especially a 3 CB formation he's a liability for me. In that sort of anchoring/covering role you can mask his deficiencies to an extend.

The real problem I have is if that back 3 will cope with the job in hand, the front 5 I think is pretty good and complimentary.

Didn't he play exactly that role in van Gaal's team before Rijkaard came back? Fairly certain he played rightback/right centerback in Ajax's UEFA Cup win in 1992?

Indeed.

 

[Balu]

@Balu @Edgar Allan Pillow It's reassuring to hear that Blind is credible in a right-sided role. The change is good though because that inter-shuttling of forward movement in AldoStain's trio requires a more cerebral presence as the last line of defence in Blind rather than Nadal.

A quick google search for Danny Blind fullback brings you to Inverting the Pyramid on googlebooks with the following phrase. Linking to it doesn't seem to work, but that's the crucial part in case someone doesn't find it:

When Ajax won the UEFA Cup in 1992, van Gaal's first major trophy, he had Wim Jonk as his number 4, the centerback turned holding midfielder. In a side of extraordinary techinical ability, the two full-backs were Frank De Boer and Danny Blind.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

The real problem I have is if that back 3 will cope with the job in hand, the front 5 I think is pretty good and complimentary.

Look at this holistically. After the change...

Andrade (is his best position per recent comments) covers Kempes. Then you have Stiles on Cubillas. Though it not a man mark job, I believe Stiles will restrict Cubillas to a good extent. Dont' claim to shut him down...but he will not be as effective with Stiles hanging around there. Hughes was a tough defender who is capable of tracking Amancio out (Hughes has played LB and DM many times) and Nadal able to drop back neatly covers that threat.

Midfield Numbers: I also bring to your notice on my better midfield. He has Dunga behind and Cubillas ahead with just Szepan shuttling through the middle. I have Brady, Michel and Ceulemans who all will put a good shit in the middle and it's built on a solid base of Stiles/Nadal. I have clear dominance here.

Creativity: And Bracy/Ceulemans/Michel put together has more creativity that even Cubillas could offer.

Attack: Add in Dalglish who was stellar in the hole behind Rush (2nd in Balon d'Or) in the exact role he's playing here. Plus the proven partnership with Rush.

 

[Moby]

The entire formation and strategy is based on wide midfield and not width.

Precisely, against a defense that is defending as a unit and the area where you have put 3-4 similar players. You NEED width, and every team does. If not from attack then midfield or defense. You don't have anyone apart from Michel capable of genuinely stretching my team and even he was more of a service provider from deep than constant running at defenders and pulling them away from the defense.

It's all fine margins but makes it all the more easy for me to defend. In contrast look at my variety:
1. One fullback on the outside overlapping and and the other utilising the space in front of him by combining with the left side of midfield and attack.
2. One genuine winger and the other being an inside forward.
3. An all round forward who brings everyone into play and the ones he does are incredible goalscorers.
4. A goalscoring playmaker who will be a tremendous threat against an undermanned backline with plenty of pockets of space to exploit.

Areas where you can't match my team:
1. Width. I can easily stretch your team on both sides, specially on the right.
2. Ball playing ability at the back. Your transition will be slow, predictable and easy to defend.
3. Pace. Your defense is considerably slower and once someone like Elkjaer is away you'l l struggle to recover, less so with others joining him.
4. Balance. I have the required numbers at the back to successfully keep you out while you have dropped a defender for an attacker/midfielder against a dangerous attack.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

@Aldo can you make the change in the OP?

 

[Moby]

Change made.

 

[Enigma_87]

It is necessary since Nadal seems quite underrated in this context. I had him as a solid capable defender. But again my terms versatility comes handy. Blind was a solid, dependable defender and a leader on the field. He was also a technically gifted and cultured player who could pass and strike the ball well for a non-attacking player. Sweeper in a back 3 is something he has done and consistently top of the game with Ajax.

Blind is a lot better at CB or even a sweeperish role in that formation. That's a very good change for me compared to the one you started with, which looked light with Nadal in the same role.

Nadal was called the beast for going forward, he wasn't "that" physical he even had more of what you can say technical game rather than being like Stam for example.

But he had far too many issues - speed, response and even agility. Especially against fast and technical players he was turned very quickly and left exposed. As a covering DM converted into some kind of CB role(even Masch Barca role) can possibly make it work, but again I really don't rate him a lot.

Hughes with Blind and V.Andrade in his native role - much better.

 

[Moby]

Change made.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Precisely, against a defense that is defending as a unit and the area where you have put 3-4 similar players.
Areas where you can't match my team:
1. Width. I can easily stretch your team on both sides, specially on the right.
2. Ball playing ability at the back. Your transition will be slow, predictable and easy to defend.
3. Pace. Your defense is considerably slower and once someone like Elkjaer is away you'l l struggle to recover, less so with others joining him.
4. Balance. I have the required numbers at the back to successfully keep you out while you have dropped a defender for an attacker/midfielder against a dangerous attack.

Very very flaky post imo.

Defending as a unit - What does that even mean? Why can't mine be considered as a unit?I can understand it's significance in a high line or a tiki take...but in a deep line.???

1. So what? Every team has it's features and you have Amancio. Just because you have a winger doesn't give you a win. Hughes is there to handle that and Nadal dropping back will cover anything that spills out. I don't see any problems there.
2. Seriously? Blind was a top class sweeper and Andrade/Hughes are no dummies with the ball either. Just a ott comment.
3. It's a compact defence shielded by 2 midfielders who will not venture forward (mentioned this repeatedly before). No hurrying back for recovery.
4. My attack is as potent as yours if not more. You have Kempes deeper and Elkjaer is not as prolific as Rush or Dalglish. With a classic AM trio, I will create and finish more than you.