Gio
★★★★★★★★
If there's a weaker spot in Skizzo/Pat's defence, it's probably the area defended by Lawro and Dunne - the very area that Sir Tom Finney will be attacking.
Fitting that you pop in just as I post that, given that you're normally the one with the boner for comfortable in possession CBs!I just watched a clip of Mark Lawrenson riddled with scouse accents, FML, I'm so bored!
It's a very good point actually. It has probably largely flown under the radar because the entire draft is jam-packed with agricultural defenders.Fitting that you pop in just as I post that, given that you're normally the one with the boner for comfortable in possession CBs!
It ain't too late to do the right thing AntoIt's a very good point actually. It has probably largely flown under the radar because the entire draft is jam-packed with agricultural defenders.
Damn, which part of "I've wanted to vote for Gio's front four for two games now" didn't you understand?
I've thought about it, but every time I rethink it I see Finney running at Dunne-Lawrenson. If there's a mismatch anywhere on the pitch, that's probably it. Then I big up Dunne a wee bit on no grounds other than loyalty to the cause... and I see Greaves, and remember this much cherished clip which once handed me a final on a plate.It ain't too late to do the right thing Anto
Think his main point wasn't Lawro but his pair having it and Gio's not having it and potentially being forced into feck ups with Charles around. Not a bad argument really.Thing with this ball-playin' CB point is that you've already got Moore there. If we're talking ability to start moves from scratch, he'll surely take care of that. So Lawro's on-the-ball skills are in the "can't hurt, but ain't really necessary" category for me.
You can argue that Gio doesn't have a typical ball player back there (Miller is average, I guess, and Walker is poor in that regard), which may or may not be relevant here - but in my opinion Lawro's status as a ball player isn't much of an argument with Moore there. It doesn't add anything crucial to the mix.
Another ball player isn't strictly necessary with Moore there granted, but having another player who is quality in possession is always an advantage. Its one less man who is liable to make a mistake on the ball and either give away a goalscoring opportunity or just surrender possession, and moreover it increases our chances of transitioning effectively and quickly. Just as an example, it'll be that bit quicker for Lawrenson to find Beckham with a pass from defence himself rather than squaring it to Moore first.Thing with this ball-playin' CB point is that you've already got Moore there. If we're talking ability to start moves from scratch, he'll surely take care of that. So Lawro's on-the-ball skills are in the "can't hurt, but ain't really necessary" category for me.
You can argue that Gio doesn't have a typical ball player back there (Miller is average, I guess, and Walker is poor in that regard), which may or may not be relevant here - but in my opinion Lawro's status as a ball player isn't much of an argument with Moore there. It doesn't add anything crucial to the mix.
Ah. Well, that makes more sense. As I read it he was to an extent pushing Lawro as a ball player (which didn't make that much sense to me - he may have been capable of playing as a DM and so forth, but he wasn't exactly Zidane on the ball).Think his main point wasn't Lawro but his pair having it and Gio's not having it and potentially being forced into feck ups with Charles around. Not a bad argument really.
Aye, basically you can never have too many players who are competent on the ball. Its kind of getting lost in the mix though that he was a bloody good defender as well, and a good choice to assist Dunne vs Finney if and when Dunne gets beaten. Lawrenson has played as a full back many times, and he has bags of pace as well as being a particularly clean and effective tackler.Think his main point wasn't Lawro but his pair having it and Gio's not having it and potentially being forced into feck ups with Charles around. Not a bad argument really.
I'm sure I'm underrating Lawro here, but I honestly don't think he's that special in this department. Not that it matters anyway - you have Moore with a suitable partner and that makes the combo as such the better one. I maintain that you edge it in the middle, whereas he edges it on the sides.Another ball player isn't strictly necessary with Moore there granted, but having another player who is quality in possession is always an advantage. Its one less man who is liable to make a mistake on the ball and either give away a goalscoring opportunity or just surrender possession, and moreover it increases our chances of transitioning effectively and quickly. Just as an example, it'll be that bit quicker for Lawrenson to find Beckham with a pass from defence himself rather than squaring it to Moore first.
I'm not talking about individualities (you are slightly better here), I'm talking about how they fit together (or rather how they grew on me). It's harsh on you, though, because both teams are created beautifully and there are no obvious flaws in either side. I will try to take a final look before the end though, maybe I'll change my mind.@harms I think if you are choosing a spine select from the players on show, it would be: Banks, Moore, Walker, Souness, Meiklejohn/Murdoch, James, Charles/Greaves. So that's 4-1 on outrights, 2 depending on fit and approach.
True on priorities when it comes to dealing with Charles. Its worth pointing out though that he's taller than either of your centre backs, and substantially taller than Miller. They're a handy pair in the air, but Beckham crossing to Charles remains a very clear and threatening route to goal.It's a question of priorities. With John Charles knocking about, you want combative and aggressive man-markers around to negate his strengths - rather than some ball-playing waif inclined to get demolished the first time a cross comes in.
In an ideal world, great to have an all-in-one but I'm struggling to think of many if any top class stopper-cum-libero types in this pool.
Cheers mate! I'm struggling to make a decision in alot of these games too. There's some very evenly matched teams out there.I'll probably won't be here until the end of the game, so I'm forced to make a decision now (and I really want to make it). Went for Skizzo as I like his spine a tad better. Very even game - and very even draft, I have to say, I'm struggling to decide in 3/4 of those games.
It's obviously harder for Finney to match Lennox's goalscoring ratio given (a) he played for Preston who weren't in the middle of winning 9 titles in a row; and (b) he's a far more creative player and set up more goals than he scored. Finney is estimated to have more than 30 assists for England.In case I'm sleeping when this is reaching its conclusion, a few points I want to re-emphasise:
1) Goal threat from midfield: Neither team is lacking in this area but we shade it. Auld was a goal every three games man in his second stint at Celtic, from a position in a two man midfield no less. He has more freedom here. James' record at Arsenal is nowhere near this, whatever other qualities he might bring to the table. Beckham hit a high water mark of 1 in 3 in 2001/02, and was generally good for around 1 in 4-5 during his peak. A comparable goal threat to Morton. He's also one of the best set-piece specialists in the draft. I'm genuinely not sure if Gio has an equivalent threat from free kicks but I doubt it. Lennox was more prolific than Finney over the course of their careers and in their best seasons - an astonishing 32 goals in 28 league games for Lennox in 1967-68 vs (a still brilliant) 26 in 34 games for Finney a decade earlier. In the central mdifeld positions we've got a pronounced advantage. Meiklejohn averaged 1 in 11.66 games over his club career and Souness 1 in 7.31, versus 1 in 8.42 for Ince and 1 in 4.89 for Murdoch.
Don't agree. Lawro's being painted as a far better player than he was. He's more famous as a pundit than a player. He's obviously been a good player for Liverpool in the 1980s, but I don't know anyone who would stick him in an all-time Ireland XI for instance. Yet Miller is an almost certainty for Scotland. And as this player pool shows, Scotland has a deeper pool of players to draw from given their competitiveness from as early as 1920 or so. So we have Moore as the standout, Walker and Miller next, and Lawro fourth. They're both complementary partnerships, but I fancy Jimmy Greaves to find the necessary half-yard that will be all that is required for him to decide the game.2) Stronger central defence: With two of the very best centre forwards in the draft on show, I back Moore/Lawrenson to do a better job on Greaves than Walker/Miller can on Charles.
A minor issue. Miller and Walker are fine for what is being asked of them. Young and Cole offer excellent transition - long or short - down the flank.3) Distribution from the back: In a game this tight, wasting possession and failing to transition quickly could prove costly. Moore and Lawrenson have a considerable advantage over Miller and especially Walker in this regard.
I think you have a bit more work-rate - largely at the expense of relative quality with it coming from Auld instead of James and Beckham instead of Finney.4) Workrate: Similarly, in a tight game the more players that can contribute defensively the better. Its asking alot to assume that the likes of James and Morton can match Beckham and Auld for graft.
Lisbon Lions were of course a great team, but let's put this into context. Nobody has got any Forest players in their team, even though they won 2 European Cups. Nobody is trying to recreate Aston Villa's 1982 European Cup winning team. Stobzilla has half of Leeds great midfield yet hasn't been showered with endless praise for it.5) Proven Partnerships: Neville and Beckham are one of the most decorated right wings in British footballing history. Lennox, Auld and Murdoch were key components in one of Britain's greatest ever club sides. Far from being lower tier, they've proven themselves on a higher stage than anyone in Gio's midfield bar Souness. Of course, Morton etc could only beat what was put in front of them, but the fact is that our Lisbon Lions have a proven track record of success at an extremely high level, and clearly elevated each other's games. They bested some of the greatest midfields of their time, including Leed's formidable early '70s unit including Giles and Bremner.
The Observer (1993) said:HE IS probably the best defender English football has produced since Bobby Moore. We saw it proved a hundred times. A red-shirted shadow moving at top speed, a brush of the shoulder and a sudden deft flick of the boot. The perfect tackle: swift, silent and conclusive. It was Des Walker's speciality.
Gary Lineker said:At his prime, he was probably as good a man-to-man marker as there was – that's how I'd play him, with Baresi sweeping behind. Des wasn't the best 'footballer' in the world, but with his speed, he was always there. Whenever we played Forest, Cloughie always stuck him on me. He was so hard to shake off, so I used to try and Des out of the centre and give them problems. I used to take him out and stand next to Stuart Pearce. A bit stupid, really.
WILLIE MILLERPeter Beardsley said:Wasn’t necessarily the best with the ball at his feet but in terms of defensive awareness there weren’t many better when he was in his prime. So rarely beaten to a ball but if he was, he had the blistering pace to recover. He was unbelievable at Italia 90, keeping many of the world’s greatest strikers at bay.
Sir Alex Ferguson said:The best penalty box defender in the world.
Karl Heinz Rummenigge said:The best defender I've ever played against.
Richard Gordon said:Willie Miller would captain my [all-time Scotland] side as he was a born leader and the best penalty box defender I have seen bar none. You rarely saw Willie making a last-ditch tackle, more often than not his razor sharp football brain saw him in the right position to block or nip the ball off a striker's toe. In addition to his physical attributes he was as mentally tough as they come.
Davie Meiklejohn v Bobby MurdochJamie Carragher said:‘Souey’ had everything. You don’t see many players who can put their foot in and also dictate a game the way he could. It’s not just about tackling, it’s also about passing too. Obviously Steven Gerrard is a great player and maybe in years to come he can compare to Souness, but I’ve seen videos of Graeme and he was probably more like Roy Keane and Glenn Hoddle rolled into one.
Willie Thornton said:The greatest player I ever saw.
However I do rate Murdoch highly and think this battle would be a draw. Both players would likely start in a Scottish second string all-time XI.John Rafferty in One Hundred Years of Scottish Football said:Perhaps Scotland's greatest ever centre-half.
Whether he's seen as Arsenal's greatest ever player or not, it's pretty clear he's a class or two above Auld.Vital Arsenal said:James was the first footballer of his generation to be considered an artiste, his passing relied not only on devastating accuracy, but unrivalled vision... He returned to fitness for the 1932-33 season in which Arsenal won the league at a canter, scoring a record 127 goals. No official records exist, but James is thought to have chalked up in excess of 50 direct assists in that season. Indeed, James, much like his modern day equivalent Dennis Bergkamp, was never much of a goalscorer, clocking up a meagre 27 goals in 261 games. But his assist record would likely be astronomical. He simply made Arsenal's greatest ever side tick and is widely considered by those that saw him as Arsenal's greatest ever player.
You put it very nicely yourself regarding the ebb in quality in European football around the time that Forest and Villa won it. The same accusation can't really be levelled about the era that Celtic triumphed in. That said, the likes of John Robertson of Forest can consider himself unlucky not to get picked here. Stobz gets a great deal of credit from me for his midfield.Lisbon Lions were of course a great team, but let's put this into context. Nobody has got any Forest players in their team, even though they won 2 European Cups. Nobody is trying to recreate Aston Villa's 1982 European Cup winning team. Stobzilla has half of Leeds great midfield yet hasn't been showered with endless praise for it.
It's helpful to get that perspective on the Bundesliga. I can see Theon's point there for a couple of reasons. While the 1982 and 1986 World Cups boasted a lot of exciting and technically impressive football, 1978 was a bit meh in many ways. And even considering the club game, that Liverpool team, no doubt under-appreciated here, don't really stack up against the 2-4 very best club sides of all time - despite winning 4 European Cups. Same goes for Forest - do we for example have a single Forest player in the draft?! Or we look at how not a single European team won the Intercontinental Cup between Bayern in 1976 and Juventus in 1985. Not that these weren't anything but great sides, but maybe evident of a blip at the top end of the European game.
Exactly my rationale for voting for Skizzo/Pat and they were 2-0 down as well. Shame there is no draw option as this match looks like a deadlock if there ever was one.I'm not talking about individualities (you are slightly better here), I'm talking about how they fit together (or rather how they grew on me). It's harsh on you, though, because both teams are created beautifully and there are no obvious flaws in either side. I will try to take a final look before the end though, maybe I'll change my mind.
I must say, the fact that Skizzo/Pat were losing made my choice much easier.
He played as a deep-lying centre-forward from 1956, so it's irrelevant herean astonishing 32 goals in 28 league games for Lennox in 1967-68 vs (a still brilliant) 26 in 34 games for Finney a decade earlier