40s Draft SF1 : harms vs Joga Bonito

[Joga Bonito]

It's crazy, ain't it? He really was a midget - Messi would tower above him.

Aye, he'd give Giresse a run for his money . Btw what's your take on the match? Just want to get some discussion going.

Anyway I'd summarise my thoughts

I've already made my feelings clear on harms forward quad - mighty fine individuals but there are compatibility issues and stylistic overlaps prevalent imo. Likewise, his Dutch spine is arguably his greatest strength here and I just don't think he's given them the ideal platform nor the set-up to shine here, esp Cruyff in that attack who I very much doubt would be at his sparkling best here.

Moving on, I'd say Netzer would arguably be the most threatening player on the pitch against a midfield duo, which already has their hands full with Eusébio dropping deep. With Beckenbauer (who's playing a reserved game here) and C.Alberto to dovetail with on the ball during the build-up phase, and plenty of movement, pace and width around him to exhibit his stunning repertoire of passes, I just can't look past him delivering a match winning performance here. He just needed the ideal midfield platform, electric forwards, full command of the team, a fair amount of width and most importantly a fairly direct set-up and I believe I've delivered my end of the bargain here.

As I've made clear in my write-up, the defense basically consists of a fairly conservative trio in Greig-Schwarzenbeck-Beckenbauer with C.Alberto playing his balanced wing-back role that he did in the WC final, supporting the offense or going on the overlap when he sees fit - in tandem with Alan Ball (I beseech you all to watch his compilation)


So it's a defense, led by Der Kaiser himself, that should hold its own against harms excellent but fragmented attack. A shout out to Der Kaiser's defensive masterclass in the WC final btw.

In attack you've got the explosive Eusébio and the perfect complement for him in Law. I've repeatedly banged on about the all-round game of Law's and how he combined brilliantly with just about any teammate of his. I doubt you'd ever hear a single negative word about him from one of his teammates - he was THE ideal player that you'd want to play alongside.

Spoiler

He was a fabulous guy to be around, a real man's man. I made my Scotland debut against Holland in Amsterdam in May 1959. Denis was playing that day, too, and we hit it off. He oozed charisma, but was far from being big-headed. He was just one of the lads and never came across as Billy Big-Time.

He was a dream to play alongside, too. Utterly unselfish. There was none of this superstar stuff with Denis. No chance. He was one of the boys and raced around and chased the ball all day. You watch some of the petulant prima donnas strutting around and preening themselves and I can tell you they haven't got a fraction of the talent of the ability Denis possessed. He was genuine class, no argument.

On my debut, it got a bit untidy at one stage and I can assure you Denis wasn't slow to get in there with some Dutch heavyweights. There were tackles flying around everywhere and the Dutch fans were baying for blood. There were over 55,000 in the ground, as I recall, and it couldn't have been more competitive if it had been the World Cup Final. You look at Denis and there isn't a pick on him. He certainly didn't take one of those Charles Atlas courses that were around at the time. You know the ones I mean. The advertisement of this muscle-bound bloke, posing in tight swimming trunks, saying, "You, too,can have a body like mine. No-one will ever kick sand in your face." Denis would have probably made mincemeat of him. It was only too easy to be impressed by Denis. There wasn't an awful lot of him, but he really got stuck in. It's rare that a guy who is so obviously gifted gets involved in the physical side of things. There are some blokes out there who can play football alright, but they couldn't tackle a fish supper. Not Denis. I never saw him shirk a challenge in my life.'

When I signed Denis I knew that we had the most exciting player in the game. He was the quickest-thinking player I ever saw, seconds quicker than anyone else. He had the most tremendous acceleration and could leap to enormous heights to head the ball with almost unbelievable accuracy and often the power of a shot. He had the courage to take on the biggest and most ferocious of opponents and his passing was impeccable. He was one of the most unselfish players I have ever seen. If he was not in the best position to score, he would give the ball to someone who was. When a chance was on for him. even only half a chance, or in some cases, no chance at all for anybody but for him, whether he had his back to goal, was sideways on, or the ball was on the deck or up at shoulder-height, he would have it in the net with such power and acrobatic ability that colleagues and opponents alike could only stand and gasp. No other player scored as many miracle goals as Denis Law. Goals which looked simple as Denis tapped them in, were simple only because Denis got himself into position so quickly that opponents just couldn't cope with him.

As my contribution to the side improved I felt more and more at home. I was "big" enough to even answer Denis Law back, and that was brave for me. When I was first came into the side, I hardly dared speak to him, and all that Law had said to me was, "How are you going, son?" accompanied, I might say, with a clip on the ear.

But I was lucky to start out alongside such a player. World class. Truly, not simply a figment of the media's imagination. I must say that my first reaction when I heard I was in the team, was not so much one of worry, as the feeling that with such skilful players around, I just couldn't go wrong.

Soon after I got established in the team, I found I was at outside left with Law my inside partner. Even in my first season, when I was on the right wing as all the forward places were being mixed and matched, Law was playing inside right. I think we hit it off quite quickly on the field, and off it for that matter, though we are very different people.

Denis Law was a livewire, always in a hurry, and despite his experience and achievements, he always got very nervous before a game. He also couldn't bear to watch the team if he was missing from a game and there was a lot at stake; he would rather sit it out in the dressing room. I was always asked at this time, what it was like to play alongside Law. It was the easiest question to answer: it was a dream, a tremendous experience because he did things so much faster than most other players. If a pass from Denis Law failed to reach you, it was odds on that you were not thinking fast enough to be in the right place for it.

I admired Denis as a player because he was exceptional and very different from a lot of British players from his era. Then British football was characterised by stamina and determination of the players, who had excellent physical fitness. This is true, too of other European countries - including the Germans, who are superbly prepared physically. But the British and the Germans, generally, both lacked technique. I have played against Denis Law quite a few times and have also played with him for FIFA and UEFA representative teams.

Law is a very fine footballer and thoroughly deserved the European Footballer of the Year award he gained in 1964. He is a good team man with fine individual skills.

He cost around £100 000, big money for a British player in those days. The speed and technical brilliance of Law reminded the supporters of their former hero, Valentino Mazzola. They had never seen anyone quite as quick-thinking as Denis. He was always two or three moves ahead. It was a pity he only stayed a year.

You can call me biased - and I'm - but I'd go as far as to say that Law was the more creative and technically gifted player than Eusébio, whilst the latter was a one-man wrecking crew capable of destroying sides single-handedly. They linked up pretty well in the FA Centenary match too, where Law was undoubtedly the best player on show in a team featuring the likes of Schnellinger, Masopust, Djalma Santos, Gento, di Stefano, Eusébio, Kopa etc.


It's precisely his selflessness, all-round game and team ethic in combination with his brilliant ability, which would be the key aspect to elevating his alliance with Eusébio to the next level. It isn't so much a partnership of a limited centre forward (Jose Torres for eg) and a second striker, but rather the perfect amalgamation of a selfless, facilitating centre forward and an individualistic ball-carrying monstrosity of a second-striker.

 

[Joga Bonito]

Bump.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Btw what's your take on the match? Just want to get some discussion going.

Whether one buys - or perhaps rather to what extent one buys - harms' Cruyff/Albert combo (and the dynamics of that whole front four, one could also add) - would be the main question. I don't fully buy the Pelé-Tostao idea proposed above as far as this is concerned.

I also think you have an edge centrally, the upside of that lopsided set-up with Ball in his particular role, should make the Wimmer-Netzer-Ball combo work pretty much as you propose - he is too light there for my money to sufficiently counter that edge, I can see Netzer having a good game here, being relatively unshackled.

I honestly think it's pretty close, though.

 

[harms]

bumping it again

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Have given slight advantage to harms. Joga will have bet more possession with strength in middle, but harms attack is just too much to contain. Esp wit Cryuff having a free role.

Though I don't know why Albert tends to operate behind Cryuff in that gif. Why have him upfront with a arrow behind as against playing him as a AM straight? 4-2-4 against modern formations will land more often than not in disaster imo.

Every time I think about this, I might change my vote. Bloody close!

 

[harms]

Every time I think about this, I might change my vote. Bloody close!

get out of this thread then

 

[Joga Bonito]

Why have him upfront with a arrow behind as against playing him as a AM straight? 4-2-4 against modern formations will land more often than not in disaster imo.

That's simply because there is a significant overlap between both players - both loved dropping deep, playmaking and also driving forward, with the play revolving around them. harms has tried to downplay that issue, pretty intelligently at that too, by sporting them both to be #9.5s and functioning as a pair, despite them essentially playing the same roles. How is Cruyff going to be dropping deep and influencing play when Albert is looking to do the same exact thing? Would either of them be willing to play a subservient and a decoy runner role when the situation calls for it, or play as a facilitating spear head in a selfless manner to accommodate the other? Not as far as I'm concerned, as both were players talismans of their respective teams and extremely domineering and individualistic players who required a certain amount of tactical subservience from their teammates.

Have given slight advantage to harms. Joga will have bet more possession with strength in middle, but harms attack is just too much to contain. Esp wit Cryuff having a free role.

Every time I think about this, I might change my vote. Bloody close!

Likewise I boast a central duo which boast a stunning 1012 goals, 2 Ballon d'Ors, 2 European Cups, 1 World Cup Golden Boot, 4 European Cup Top Scorer accolades amongst other trophies. Throw in the goalscoring threat of Ball, Netzer and Gadocha into the frame and I'd say my attack is quite formidable too, as is harms's. Also there are issues with the cohesiveness of harms attack - to what extent would Cruyff be able to play a 'free-role' at his best in a set-up which doesn't quite cater to his strengths nor ally him with the ideal and complementary personnel. I'd already gone into that in detail in the first page and don't want to keep repeating myself and criticising harms team in the process.

Anyway I'd say that my defense quite clearly has the edge here and in Beckenbauer-Schwarzenbeck you have arguably one of the greatest central duos of all time and in C.Alberto, arguably the greatest RB ever after Djalma Santos. John Greig was an excellent defender in his own right and as discussed above, one who was frequently entrusted in squaring up against wee Jimmy. So a great defense which is well-matched individually against harms attack but also as a collective would function much better as an unit, with players having clear and well-defined roles (can't be too hard, seeing as it is a defense tbf).

Likewise, I'd say I edge the midfield battle here with Netzer being relatively free to do damage, esp with the deadly Eusébio always lurking about in the periphery of harms midfield duo.

 

[Joga Bonito]

I'd have to go in a while and won't be back for some time. Regardless of how it turns out, it's been an intriguing match-up and hopefully discussions will have picked up by then.

 

[harms]

How is Cruyff going to be dropping deep and influencing play when Albert is looking to do the same exact thing? Would either of them be willing to play a subservient and a decoy runner role when the situation calls for it, or play as a facilitating spear head in a selfless manner to accommodate the other? Not as far as I'm concerned

I still don't know why you think that, really. Both are extremely intelligent players and when one goes back the other pushes forward - it's very simple and they both have the skillset to do so. Look at my quotes about Albert, for example - he was a goalscorer first and a creator as a bonus. Cruyff moves all around the pitch, it's his natural game and it involved decoy runs to create spaces for the likes of Keizer (Lennox) and Neeskens (in this part - Albert pushing forward).

You are really making the game-changing problem out of nothing here, which is quite smart, to take the views of the voters from your right flank, where Facchetti-Lennox-Van Hanegem operate against pushing forward C. Alberto and half time midfielder Ball; and Gadocha vs Dzodzuashvili, considering that the Soviet man kept Best and Dzajic quiet it's fair to say that he will minimize your only real flank.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

hat's simply because there is a significant overlap between both players - both loved dropping deep, playmaking and also driving forward, with the play revolving around them. harms has tried to downplay that issue, pretty intelligently at that too, by sporting them both to be #9.5s and functioning as a pair, despite them essentially playing the same roles. How is Cruyff going to be dropping deep and influencing play when Albert is looking to do the same exact thing?

fair point. It was the first thing that struck my mind, but then this is Cryuff, not any other striker who can drop deep. Cryuff usually plays right wing to left back and all interim positions in a match. If there's one player, I think this could work with, it's Cryuff. I wouldn't even consider Pele-Albert to be a optimal pair in this case.

You have a phenomenal team too, but I don't know why I just somehow have a thing with Ball being part of your midfield. I don't know why, but it does seem unbalanced a bit. He's box to box in a classic sense and I struggle to see him and Netzer together. I know you have covered this before, but still it just stick to my mind. Think I mentioned this last match too. Sorry!

 

[Joga Bonito]

Both are extremely intelligent players and when one goes back the other pushes forward - it's very simple and they both have the skillset to do so. Look at my quotes about Albert, for example - he was a goalscorer first and a creator as a bonus.

That really couldn't be further from the truth, he was a direct player and a goalscorer but you are seriously underestimating the creative aspects of his gameplay and also the fact that he was a dominant playmaker on the ball, despite being a direct one.

Cruyff moves all around the pitch, it's his natural game and it involved decoy runs to create spaces for the likes of Keizer (Lennox) and Neeskens (in this part - Albert pushing forward).

Albert is in no way similar to Neeskens at all, one was quite clearly a well-defined and a direct midfielder attacking from deep and wasn't so much a ball-hogger and was willing to play a subservient role to Cruyff, making decoy runs etc when the occasion called for it. Albert was the exact opposite of that. A more apt comparison for Lennox would be Rep and of course Johnstone wouldn't be the ideal complement for Cruyff here.

and Gadocha vs Dzodzuashvili, considering that the Soviet man kept Best and Dzajic quiet it's fair to say that he will minimize your only real flank.

Yes, it's nice that he kept Dzajic quiet but I don't see how it has a bearing on this match. I myself have Paul Reaney who repeatedly kept George Best quiet but that doesn't mean I extrapolate that performance and apply it to every single winger in the draft, given that Best is the best winger in this draft. Might as well pick him ahead of Pele then.

It goes without saying that both Dzodzuashvili and Kaplychnyi are the weakest defenders on the pitch and arguably the weakest players on the pitch, relatively of course - Dzodzuashvili being a 7th pick and Kaplychnyi being a 10th pick in the drafting process. I'm not going to be harsh and say they aren't semi-final material, and they are fairly decent cogs to have in a team but to claim they would minimize or shut down Gadocha here is quite disingenuous.

Gadocha was one of the greatest Polish wingers of all time and had a fantastic WC in 1974, leading Poland to a 3rd place finish. Of the 16 goals that Poland scored in the 1974 WC finals, 5 were directly assisted by Gadocha (the most assists in the tournament with Cruyff coming second with 3 assists) and two more were from crosses by Gadocha, which were headed down by Szarmach to Lato. It's no wonder that these two forwards ended up with the Golden Boot & Silver Boot with Gadocha in the team. How many wingers can claim to have that sort of an impact on a World Cup? His performances in the tournament led him to finishing 8th in the Ballon d'or that year.

You are really making the game-changing problem out of nothing here, which is quite smart, to take the views of the voters from your right flank, where Facchetti-Lennox-Van Hanegem operate against pushing forward C. Alberto and half time midfielder Ball;

I seriously doubt van Hanegem would be able to influence the left flank from a static midfield pivot, seeing as he is already fighting a losing battle against a midfield trio which features Netzer whilst also having to contend with Eusébio dropping deep occasionally. Lennox too was a goalscoring inside forward who would more likely be squaring up against the back trio of Greig-Beckenbauer-Schwarzenbeck and it goes without saying that C.Alberto was a defender of the highest calibre who balanced both offensive and defensive duties to perfection.

Half-time midfielder eh? It was a 'half-time midfielder' who was driving two of the top 10 LB GOATS in Marzolini and Schnellinger to the ground playing for the World Cup winning wingless wonders and won the MOTM in the World Cup final. Ironically enough my right flank is one of the strongest areas on the pitch and one which I dedicated an entire post to in the OP . I would love for voters to focus on the right flank in fact.

I don't quite see issue with Netzer and Ball here @Edgar Allan Pillow. Ball most certainly wasn't a box to box in a classic sense but a really unique package altogether. Netzer was primarily a central midfielder and not a #10, who always had the play and the ball in front of him. So there is no clash at all or balance issues here. I'd just post my Alan Ball segment from the OP again and I'd really really suggest giving the video below a watch and I'm sure you would change your opinion altogether.

Mr Perpetual Motion & O Capitão do Tri

The indefatigable Ball and the classy Carlos Alberto make for a terrifying cocktail of penetrative zest and tranquil collectedness. Both players have played starring roles for World Cup winning teams and most importantly, have excelled at manning their flanks almost single-handedly in these tournaments.


(Here is a compilation that I made, please try and watch it if you can. From hounding players, carrying the ball forward, providing defense splitting balls, making an inordinate amount of ball recoveries and of course, tormenting the left backs, the video goes to show you what a complete and ubiquitous phenomenon Ballie was.)

The key to the system was probably Ball, whose tremendous energy meant he could operate both as a winger and as a midfielder - just as Zagallo had for Brazil in 1962.

Ball played as a RAM for Alf Ramsey's wingless wonders and delivered a MOTM performance in the final, where he drove one of the greatest LBs of all time in Schnellinger, to the ground in brutal fashion. It was a fiercely competed match with both Germany and England, two heated rivals, refusing to concede an inch of space and were laying everything on the line. When just about every single player on the pitch was sapped of every last iota of their energy reserves, it was Ball who was still zipping about, like as though the match had just started.

Just an insight into the gruelling conditions of the final.

The darkness came when, with the score at 3-2 for us in the second half of extra-time, I ran ahead of the ball and took a pass from Bally in the outside right position. The roar of the crowd swelled as I raced on the overlap. I looked up and said to myself, 'Yes, near post, I'll go for that.' But when I came to make contact with the ball something shocking and terrifying happened. I felt everything go. The sensation was of 'whoosh,' and everything had left me. The ball trickled off the toe of my boot and over the line. I just stood there, empty, and one concern was that my bowels had emptied, which would have been a terrible embarrassment because unlike by team-mates I did not wear a jock-strap or a slip beneath my shorts. But if my worst fear proved to be unfounded, I still had a dreadful problem.

In the last desperate minutes of a World Cup final, and at a time when the fresh legs of substitutes were not available, it took a tremendous effort just to move. Bally had run to take a return pass and he came past me, rooted to the spot where the breakdown had come, my socks around my ankles, his eyes were blazing. 'Move, you bastard, move,' he screamed. Bally was on fire and prepared to run forever. Before the mist came, I knew the best I could do was drag one foot in front of the other.

The German great Karl-Heinz Schnellinger, a star in the Italian league but, in the most important match of his life, was left absolutely ragged and demoralised in the wake of the red-haired young Lancastrian with the squeaky voice.

 

[Joga Bonito]

Continued...

Whilst Ball's performance in the final is well-renowned, his master-class against another great in Marzolini, in the quarter finals is criminally overlooked.

They’ve got a very attacking left fullback called Marzolini who, if not stopped, will cause us problems; and you’re the best person in this squad to stop him.

And boy, did he put a stop to the best left back of the tournament. Ball once again made mince meat of a defensive great and completely nullified his influence on the game, at times hounding the measured Marzolini and winning possession off him or emphatically forcing him into uncharacteristically giving the ball away.

Ball was superb, not merely troubling Argentina offensively, but preventing their full-back, Silvio Marzolini, from advancing

Carlos Alberto was a cerebral influence from the back, capable of building up attacks and supporting the offense in a sophisticated manner but he was also an immensely powerful runner capable of foraging forward purposefully when the occasion called for it. Whilst he played a supporting full-back role for the most of the WC 1970, he was called on to play a buccaneering wing-back role in the final.

Always, if it's possible, make a movement to the left side to bring Facchetti with you to make space for Carlos Alberto to go forward.

Carlos Alberto simply owned that right flank single-handedly and as Bobby Moore remarked, his creative influence down the right was a critical aspect to unlocking the Italian catenaccio defense and getting one over Facchetti. It would be disingenuous of me to claim a repeat of that happening here, as Facchetti was largely preoccupied with Jairzinho, but in tandem with one Alan Ball, and two fluid forwards who were at ease dropping off to either flank, Carlos Alberto would be a force to be reckoned with here.

 

[Gio]

Both brilliant teams of course. There's been quite a bit made of the compatibility issues up top. But I think you can question Eusebio/Law as much as Albert/Cruyff. Essentially neither has the upper hand in those stakes.

 

[harms]

Clearly there won't be another comeback in this game. Good luck going forward, Joga, though you were overly harsh on my attack, imo.

 

[Joga Bonito]

Both brilliant teams of course. There's been quite a bit made of the compatibility issues up top. But I think you can question Eusebio/Law as much as Albert/Cruyff. Essentially neither has the upper hand in those stakes.

I'd have to disagree with you on that one. Actually it's because of my midfield set-up that I chose to go with Eusébio instead of reuniting the fabulous duo of C.Alberto-Jairzinho and of course the prospect of the Law-Eusébio partnership was just too good to pass up on. Wimmer is playing a defensive and a positionally reserved role and Netzer* was a central midfielder who always had the play in front of him - more akin to a deeper central midfielder than a #10.

Whereas Alan Ball is playing a RAM role, where he would almost exclusively be drifting onto the right flank/channels, in a similar vein to the role that he fulfilled for the wingless wonders.

What it ultimately means is that there is plenty of space in the opposition's central half waiting to be exploited. That was one of the prime reasons why I went with Eusébio instead of Jairzinho (of course being a bigger name played its part too). I've always banged on about Law's tendency to drop deep and influence play etc. However, it is essential to note that even when dropping deep, Law wasn't so much a selfish ball-hogger, always looking to go on mazy runs (he was capable of doing so but only did so occasionally and only when the opportunity was absolutely right), as to being a selfless facilitator - linking-up play, aiding the midfield/strike partner and spreading play etc. In the sense he was more of an all-round forward ala Seeler than a Messi/Sindelaar- playmaking false nines. Do keep in mind that, given the large area and tactical room that both Eusébio and him have to manoeuvre in, due to my specialised midfield set-up, Law would have the freedom to drop deep.

Also there is absolutely no denying his body of work in and around the penalty box - capable of spear heading the attack? - check; aerial presence - check; hold-up play - check; poaching goals - check etc. I've never claimed that Law shouldn't play as a centre-forward but rather that he shouldn't be stranded up top and should be provided with the tactical freedom to drop deep as he saw fit. He has just that here. Perhaps in another midfield set-up with a more #10 like midfielder instead of Netzer, then your point about Eusébio & Law not clicking well due to not having enough room, might have been valid. With this specific midfield set-up though, I don't see that being the case at all.

Anyway if all that fails to convince you, there is always the FA centenary match where both of them dovetailed fantastically well.

I admired Denis as a player because he was exceptional and very different from a lot of British players from his era. Then British football was characterised by stamina and determination of the players, who had excellent physical fitness. This is true, too of other European countries - including the Germans, who are superbly prepared physically. But the British and the Germans, generally, both lacked technique. I have played against Denis Law quite a few times and have also played with him for FIFA and UEFA representative teams.

Law is a very fine footballer and thoroughly deserved the European Footballer of the Year award he gained in 1964. He is a good team man with fine individual skills.

*In fact Netzer's playing style played a significant role in me going for Eusébio too. I've always stated that Netzer absolutely loved playing alongside direct players and would much rather play with a Neeskens rather than an Iniesta. He wasn't a playmaker who would have been peeved off at forwards individuality but rather someone who actively encouraged it. He wasn't your typical playmaker who loved to hog the ball, expecting, nay demanding everything should go through him, playing those one-twos ala Xavi etc. What Netzer really was about was pure directness and fiery football. Netzer was the anti-thesis of a ponderous playmaker, needing things to revolve around him, dictating play, but rather he was a high octane playmaker who let the play 'flow' through him and was more of a 'dispatcher' as opposed to a 'dictator'. His flawless between the line passing would be a dream come true for Eusébio, who would be prowling around in between the lines and channels, waiting for the opportune moment.

Clearly there won't be another comeback in this game. Good luck going forward, Joga, though you were overly harsh on my attack, imo.

Apologies on that mate and it's not been a great match in terms of the turnout, which make my criticisms seem more concentrated. I do think perhaps I went a bit overboard in terms of scrutinising the trio of Cruyff-Albert-Johnstone but I really do believe that they won't mesh well together, esp in a 4-2-4. I really think you should have gone with a 4-3-3 without Albert - a set-up which would have brought the best out of your Dutch spine and most importantly, provided you with the ideal midfield in Mühren-van Hanegem-Roth, which would have been perfect in terms of balance and in squaring up against my midfield trio. I really loved the 4-3-3 that you sported last round, apart from Bedin's presence, and you got a serious boost to the midfield with van Hanegem, and Facchetti to reinforce the defense and add a lot to your theme overall. The only flaw in that side would have been the ball-hogging tendencies of Johnstone being a hindrance to Cruyff but overall, that team would have been great - I barely criticised your team in the OP apart from that sole mention of Johnstone-Cruyff.

The current set-up just seemed like a case of taking too much away from Cruyff and his Dutch pals to shoehorn Albert into the side - thereby bringing questions over the compatibility of the attack, compromising the fluidity of the entire set-up and essentially conceding the midfield battle. Cruyff alone in the middle brought tons of creativity, ability to run the side and a plethora of goals, so imho Albert was essentially surplus to requirements here - regardless of whether he combines well with Cruyff or not. The extra man in midfield would have been better your side and for this game imo. I don't think there really would have been anything for me to criticise (apart from Johnstone not being a complementary presence) if you played the 4-3-3.