Billy No Mates Draft: SF - Tuppet vs Enigma_87/MJJ

[Physiocrat]

Tuppet

* I have better attack, despite of the individual brilliance of Pele & Cruyff, I would argue De Stefano + Gerd Muller is a better (or atleast equal) combination. But factor in one of the greatest winger of all time Garrincha and my attack has more firepower, gels better and has more ways to hurt our opponents.

* There is no denying Enigma/MJJ have a better central defense, Baresi & Nesta is an outstanding combination and that is why Garrincha is going to be so important. While Camacho is a decent defender, I’ve seen him getting beaten by Dzajic repeatedly and Garrincha is on a different level in terms of dribbling and beating his marker. This would either lead to Baresi getting pulled wide to cover, leaving Nesta an almost impossible task to stop Der Bomber alone. Or this means Garrincha would provide chances after chances to Muller, or may be even cut in and take a shot himself. This is as good a goal route as any in the game.

* Pele + Cruyff unstoppable ? Probably, I am not sure they are the best combination, Pele at his goal scoring best was still a second striker with vava being the front man, and there might be some problems when he drops deep and Cruyff moves forward. Still I don’t want to harp on this point too much, as this is very much a nit pick and these are 2 of the greatest attackers of all time and they would probably find a way to co-exist in the same pitch. Just a small point that here the total is probably not going to be the sum of parts. Another effect of this would be that I am sure, Henry is going to start over Giggs to move to front when Pele drops, which means even less defensive support for Camacho when facing Garrincha.

* My midfield shield of Neeskens & Matthaus is as good as you go to provide both steel and technical ability. I definitely have an upper hand in midfield, with 2 of the best midfielder on pitch (of all time) both starting on my side. Both of my midfielders would be more disciplined in this game, knowing that playmaking is left to Di Stefano primarily. Both have ability for it as well, with Neeskens usually playing a second role to Cruyff and Matthaus doing a job on Maradona. Now Putting a man marking on Cruyff is futile (even more than Maradona) since he excelled in playing all over the pitch, hence our midfield would look to hold on to the ball and apply quick pressure on Cruyff to win it back. My high energy midfield is perfect for it.

* About my defense, Passarella and Nasazzi are two of greatest world cup winning captains. Passarella would be the ball playing CB and Nasazzi would stopper. Now while it is probably accepted that Passarella is a defender of highest quality, Jose Nasazzi is probably going to get under rated big time. Before you vote, please take a look at this post, where I have done a detailed write up on him. Simply put he is a legend of the game, 3 time world champion (2 times olympic, which was de facto world championship then), only defender ever to won the best player at world cup, 2 times best player at Copa America, 26th best ever South American player (Ahead of likes of Romario). He usually does not get his dues because there is not much footage available of him in action. But by all accounts (and you can look at the write up) he was a fantastic stopper, and would make a perfect partnership with Passarella. Nasazzi was fast, strong and fantastic in air albeit with limited technical ability. But with Passarella beside him and technical midfield in front he doesn’t really need to do much with ball.

* Maldini would keep control of Figo all game long and would provide support to Boniek as well. With Boniek and Maldini I think I have advantage on left wing as well.

* Andrade would stay back and disciplined on Henry, which suits both Garrincha and Andrade who was a great marker. With his pace, physicality and ability to tuck in the midfield, he is a great counter for Henry.

* Boniek is a great foil for Garrincha, a hard working wing forward who was a great goal threat himself, with a defensively solid Andrade behind Garrincha, every thing is set perfectly for Mane to have a great game here and be the difference maker.

TL; DR -
I have better midfield, and much better wide attack, while our central attack is more complementary and equally threatening. While Enigma/MJJ’s central defense is better, mine is also pretty damn good and is protected by better midfield shield. My fullbacks are much better at their roles, and Garrincha - Camacho would be the biggest mismatch of the game. Its hard to see either Keane or Effenberg holding their own against Di Stefano, who would run this game. While Pele & Cruyff is an attack that is impossible to shut completely, I hope with my better midfield and wings, I would keep more possession and create more chances, with the best ever goal scorer in front I hope to outscore them.

subs - Junior, Hierro, Davids, Coluna, Jairzinho

Tuppet

Enigma_87/MJJ

Change at 2308

Spoiler: Original Formation

 

[Physiocrat]

Enigma_87/MJJ

Squad summary and key points:

GK: Pat Jennings - "Good morning God," was how Arsenal's players greeted goalkeeper Pat Jennings during the great Irishman's reign as the teams undisputed number one in the 1970's and 1980's. He was the first goalkeeper to save with his feet consistently, his clearances got a good length and his goal kicks had a great distance. During his time he was one of the best in one-on-one situations which invariably saved Arsenal and Spurs a lot of the time. Incredibly agile just flung out of the goal mouth and pretty much caught anything.

RB: Manuel Amoros - Manuel Amoros was a versatile full-back which he was able to play both left and right-side without a significant different due to his great in both feet. He was an extraordinary wing-back in the world during 1980s with his fast, excellent movement, intelligent and skillful. He was really an excellent combo both defensively and offensively. Will be up against Boniek. The combination of top notch speed and excellent defensive qualities should match well and will make him very hard to beat and I think he's very good match up for him.

CB: Franco Baresi - Not much to say that is not known - Possibly the best defender ever and certainly the best on the pitch. Ray Wilkins probably describes him best - "Franco was the best player I have ever played with. The guy was world class to his core. He had everything – pace, two feet, and he was a leader of men". He'll be the last stop for anyone of Muller/Garrincha/Boniek/Di Stefano. With his phenomenal reading of the game he was always where the ball was and was extremely tough for any striker to get a sniff at, and he played with the best.

CB: Alessandro Nesta - he won 5th European footballer of the year in 2000, was the best defender in the world in early 2000s which he won defender of the year almost every season. He was known for pace, strength, tackling, positional sense, tactical awareness, vision and technical ability unbecoming of a central defender – to name but a few of his qualities. He is a centre forward’s worst nightmare – a defender with no weaknesses to exploit, an irresistible force, an uncompromising machine that will, no matter the occasion, no matter the situation, remain focused on his sole mission: to stop the other team from scoring. Him and Baresi are excellent pair together and given their reading of the game and how tactically astute they are I expect them to keep all central dangers and also covering if one of our full backs get beaten.

LB: J.A. Camacho - One of the most complete left back ever and a Real Madrid legend. Cafu level of stamina and tirelessness he'll chase everyone down the pitch, most particularly Garrincha. A quote of Mario Kempes describes him best : "If you think he sweats a lot as a coach, imagine how much he sweated as a player. He was like a hunting dog; wherever you went on the pitch, he went. You knew that if you looked over your shoulder, he'd be there waiting for you. He didn't talk either, he just breathed in a very strange way - "Fsst, fsst, fsst, fsst"! A real nightmare."

MC: Stefan Effenberg- "The boss" is our leader in the middle of the park. One of football's hardman but also with great passing ability and range. A true leader and warior in the middle of the park. I think his role is quite important in this game he'll have to distribute the ball, something he's very well known but also put a defensive shift in - which also ticks in.


DM/MC: Roy Keane -Few men encompass the phrase "fighting spirit" as much as Roy Keane, who became a talisman for Manchester United during the most successful period in the club's history. His duels with fellow great Patrick Vieira are legendary, as are his crunching tackles and short fuse. Behind all the aggression, however, was a player of immense quality, with Sir Alex Ferguson acknowledging him as the greatest player he has ever coached. Under his leadership, United won seven Premier League titles, four FA Cup titles, and a Champions League. He later won a Scottish League title and Cup with Celtic, as well as winning 66 Republic of Ireland caps. Surely one of top 3 or five when it comes to defensive contribution alone.

LW: Thierry Henry - Peak Henry was one of those strikers that were unstoppable. His assist and goals tally speak for itself. He'll be up against Andrade and his pace and direct style will surely give him a torrid time. I expect Henry to exploit the spaces and tuck in to score himself also engaging one of Tuppets CB to create space for Cruyff/Pele.

In the hole/free role - Johan Cruyff - best player in Europe's history bar none. He could defend comfortably like a regular in defence even in the back lines of the field. The central piece of the total football in the Mechanic Orange - ultimate General on the pitch, organizing total football on the pitch. In '74WC almost every actions started end finished with a pass of Cruyff, he came back to help and defend in the midfield, he started to defend in the opposite half of the pitch sometimes near the penalty area too - his condition of fitness made him able to run all the time.

RW: Luis Figo - 2000's Ballon D'Or winner has a decent shout of being one of the top right wingers of all time. Playing on either wing, Figo’s dribbling, stepovers, through balls, free-kicks, passes and reading of the game made him into a true legend. Recently Messi passed him in the all time Primera assist table after 11 years at Barca. Figo did it in 10. Excellent team player that can control the midfield and contribute both offensively and defensively.

He'll probably be up against Junior and I think we have advantage here over Tuppet's left back.

CF: Pele - Best player on pitch and probably recognized as best of all time. Not much can be said, I think his team mate Cruyff describes him best: “Pele was the only footballer who surpassed the boundaries of logic.” And one classic: "I told myself before the game, 'he's made of skin and bones just like everyone else'. But I was wrong.”
Tarcisio Burgnich, the Italy defender who marked Pele in the Mexico 1970 Final


Key points:

Midfield battle. Bot midfields should be set up pretty much the same. I can see us having an upper hand in Keane vs Neeskens when it comes to defensive game, while Tuppet will have upper hand in Matthaus against Effenberg in the box to box role. I think Keane/Effenberg is great match for both players especially given their roles during their careers and their role here. Effenberg always had a partner like Keane and with his passing range and leadership qualities I expect them to be a great match together.

Fullbacks/Wingers out wide comparison - Again I think we have very similar set up - Henry in the inside left role much like Boniek and Figo in the outside right - cutting in like Garrincha's role. I think we've pretty much equal wings quality. I can see Henry being the better goalscorer here and linking up great with Pele and Cruyff while on the other side Figo can cross or cut in and also provide endless stamina throughout the match.

Having in mind Camacho/Amoros compared to Andrade/Junior I think we should have a slight advantage here. Both natural options while Junior most likely will have the tendency to tuck in. Camacho excellent man marking abilities should match pretty well with Garrincha here and he's the best man marker on the pitch to me.

Excellent central back line - we have Baresi and Nesta in the middle with Keane shielding. That's really tough and water tight formation. Maldini is one of the best left backs in the game, but IMO both our CB should be a better option centrally, not to mention a perfect match. I also think there are not many options better than Keane in his defensive role(sadly one is on our bench).

Pele vs Muller and Cruyff vs Di Stefano - while Cruyff and Di Stefano are probably in the same league and on the same level to me, I think we have a clear advantage in Pele vs Muller. Muller is one of the best strikers in the game, but Pele edges it being one of the best all time.

Subs: Toninho Cerezo, Franz Beckenbauer, Gerson, Ryan Giggs, Oscar Ruggeri

 

[Physiocrat]

@Rado_N

Public poll please, votes visible and changeable, 24 hrs.

Tuppet wins by 1 goal
Tuppet wins by 2 goals
Tuppet wins by 3 goals
Enigma/MJJ wins by 1 goal
Enigma/MJJ wins by 2 goals
Enigma/MJJ wins by 3 goals

@Enigma_87 @MJJ @Tuppet

 

[Enigma_87]

Good luck @Tuppet

From first sight I see you went win Nasazzi and Maldini on the left. Which is certainly better for Maldini. However knowing a little bit of Nasazzi I'm not sure what type of player he is and how well he'll fit in with Passarella in terms of style.

I think we should have the better CB pair and Amoros to me is better than Andrade both defensively and offensively.

I think our key advantages is Pele & Cruyff and our CB pair where we have a clear advantage. I think Tuppet has advantage in midfield but IMO our CM pair matches pretty well and should be up for the battle.

I don't agree that Camacho is decent LB in Tuppet's description:

You don't get to be a decent LB to win this, be Real Madrid regular for 15 seasons and also win 81 caps for your country with EURO runner up place:

Camacho is the best LB in the 80's and certainly a match for Garrincha. Of course Djazic (who is one of the best left wingers as well) will beat him some times, but that goes for pretty much everybody in Tuppet's case even Maldini and of course Henry vs Andrade.

Real Madrid

• UEFA Cup: 1984–85, 1985–86
• La Liga: 1974–75, 1975–76, 1977–78, 1978–79, 1979–80, 1985–86, 1986–87, 1987–88, 1988–89
• Copa del Rey: 1973–74, 1974–75, 1979–80, 1981–82, 1988–89
• Copa de la Liga: 1984–85
• Supercopa de España: 1988, 1989

Spain

• UEFA European Championship: Runner-up 1984
  
  
  

 

[harms]

• Bad idea to choose Henry over Giggs with Pele and Cruyff already on the pitch, imo.
• Don't think that Nasazzi is a good partner for Passarella
• Tuppet clearly has a better midfield, with Keane playing in a limited role (due to "Pele feck up")
• Camacho without the support of the left winger is left for dead against Garrincha

I will look how the discussion goes but I'm edging towards Tuppet at the moment

 

[Rado_N]

Poll added.

 

[Gio]

From first sight I see you went win Nasazzi and Maldini on the left. Which is certainly better for Maldini. However knowing a little bit of Nasazzi I'm not sure what type of player he is and how well he'll fit in with Passarella in terms of style.

It seems like a complementary partnership from my take on the pair.

 

[Enigma_87]

It seems like a complementary partnership from my take on the pair.

Yeah, in terms of qualities. Saying that I don't know much about Nasazzi to comment on him. He's regarded highly for his era but in this case I think we have the better CB pair and IMO Keane will shield the defence better than Neeskens.

 

[VivaJanuzaj]

@Tuppet Maldini doesn't really need the arrow there. Same mistake with Passarella, this time you have the proper LB next to him but why put him so high and with an arrow forward when it's Maldini and we know what he's capable of, while tagging him with a partner like Passarella would be perfect!

Two unbelievable teams. I want to say this will end 9-9

 

[VivaJanuzaj]

And Giggs > Henry for this match. Definitely @Enigma_87 @MJJ

 

[Enigma_87]

• Bad idea to choose Henry over Giggs with Pele and Cruyff already on the pitch, imo.
• Don't think that Nasazzi is a good partner for Passarella
• Tuppet clearly has a better midfield, with Keane playing in a limited role (due to "Pele feck up")
• Camacho without the support of the left winger is left for dead against Garrincha

I will look how the discussion goes but I'm edging towards Tuppet at the moment

Henry is the better player out of the two and would be a better goal scoring threat to compliment Cruyff and Pele. He'll be in his favorite inside left zone but also will stretch the play.

Camacho will have a support either by Keane or Effenberg if he's beaten, not to mention our CB.

Figo will help out in the midfield as well and with Cruyff dropping in and Pele also highly mobile I can see opening space for Henry on the counter.

As for Camacho regardless of the source he's top ten material in his left back zone. I don't think that he's that big of a mismatch:

Unquestionably the very best and probably the only great Spanish left-back of-all-time. Armed with boundless stamina and both defending and attacking skills, he was one of the key players of the late 70s and 80s Real Madrid, where he won no less than nine domestic championships.

 

[Tuppet]

Best of luck @Enigma_87 @MJJ
I again forgot to add my subs - Junior, Hierro, Davids, Coluna, Jairzinho

 

[Enigma_87]

And Giggs > Henry for this match. Definitely @Enigma_87 @MJJ

Giggs can't play with Keane for this match, but either way in the reinforcement round we were looking to put Henry in inside left position. My idea initially was to have a quite interchangeable and mobile front line so that we can confuse the opposition defence. All of Cruyff/Pele/Henry and Figo tick the box.

Henry also provides a bit of help in midfield as he was that kind of player, especially in his sliding tackles.

He's better attacking outlet and we wanted an insideish forward to compliment Cruyff and Pele so they all can combine on top.

Of course he'll track back if needed, as he had in the past.

 

[Tuppet]

Good luck @Tuppet

From first sight I see you went win Nasazzi and Maldini on the left. Which is certainly better for Maldini. However knowing a little bit of Nasazzi I'm not sure what type of player he is and how well he'll fit in with Passarella in terms of style.

I can see that being a problem for many voters, while his pedigree is undisputed, people might wonder what kind of player he was so I am putting his write up here as well -

Spoiler: Jose Nasazzi

José Nasazzi - "El Gran Mariscal" ("The Great Marshal")

The World cup winning captain and defensive rock of first global super power in Football. To say Uruguay dominated the world of football in the 20s is an understatement, not only did they lifted the Jules Rimet trophy for the first time, they also were winners of Olympic tournaments in 1924 and 1928. FIFA recognize those two tournaments as the de-facto world cup and that is the reason Uruguay are allowed to sport 4 stars on their jersey.

n 1924, the Uruguay team traveled to Paris to become the first South American team to compete in the Olympic Games. In contrast to the physical style of the European teams of the era, Uruguay played a style based around short passes. European and South American nations had never met in a competitive environment before the Paris Olympics of 1924, and as the only South American representatives little was known about the side managed by Ernesto Figoli and captained by 23-year-old legend-in-waiting José Nasazzi. Italy and Hungary were favorites, but it became rapidly apparent that the tournament's star attraction – and therefore the Games' biggest draw, because football had become vital to the coffers of the organising committee – were the mysterious visitors from a faraway southern land.

When Uruguay played their first game in the Olympic tournament of 1924 the people of Paris took little notice. A Sunday match between Italy and Spain at Stade de Colombes drew a crowd of 20,000. When Uruguay faced Yugoslavia at the same stadium a day later, on 26 May, only a few hundred turned up, unaware they were about to witness something very special.

Yugoslavia, having sent spies to watch a Uruguay training session, predicted an easy win and apologised in advance for sending the South Americans home after only one game. Uruguay beat them 7-0. They had learnt of the presence of the spies and deliberately misplaced their shots and passes in training. Three days later, Uruguay defeated the United States 3-0. A Spanish correspondent, Enrique Carcellach, wrote:
I have been watching football for 20 years and have never seen any team play with the mastery of this Uruguay team. I did not suspect football could be brought to this degree of virtuosity, this artistic limit. They were playing chess with the feet!
Italy's Gazzetta dello Sport wrote of Uruguay's "musical phrasing" on the pitch, of their "stylistic perfection". The editor ofL'Equipe, Gabriel Hanot, who had himself played at international level, said Uruguay's players were "like thoroughbreds next to farm horses" in comparison to north European players. Word quickly spread, and 45,000 people saw Uruguay trounce France 5-1 in the quarter-finals. In the semis there were nearly six times more spectators at Uruguay's tie than there were at the other tie.

Four years later, European sides were more alert to the dangers posed by South American opponents at the Amsterdam Games of 1928, but remained powerless to resist. Argentina made its entrance to the big stage, 17 countries participated (England boycotted 1924 and 1928 over allowing the entrance of semi-pros), 11 from Europe, Egypt, USA, Mexico, Chile, Argentina and the eventual champs, Uruguay. Uruguay and a highly offensive Argentina swept their way to the final, Uruguay winning the replay 2-1 after the first match had ended all square. Uruguay were back-to-back champions of the world – the three main stands of the Centenario Stadium in Montevideo are named the Colombes, Amsterdam and Olympic Stands, in memory of those triumphs.

The Olympic tournament would never again have the same status, and Uruguay would not feature in it again until London 2012, but no matter; in the summers of 1924 and 1928, world football gained its first true superpower. I'd say those four stars are more than justified.

Now its easy to be considered a legend by association with a great team, especially in the light of lack of footage available. But his record and the individual accolades he won are a testament to the fact that he was no mere cog, but was absolute bed rock on which Uruguay’s world conquering success was built on. He was declared the best player of tournament in world cup 1930, to this day the only defender to have won this accolade. But that was no fluke as he also won the best player award in Copa America 1923 and 1935, while leading his team to victories. This award haul is probably unique in world football for a defender and I think he is one of the most successful NT player of all time.

He led his team to 7 international tournaments and won 6 of them, here’s Uruguay’s record with him -

CA before 3rd, with 1st, 1st, 1st, without 2nd, with 3rd, 1st, after 3rd

WC before -, with 1st, after -

OL before -, with 1st, 1st, after -

Could've won second World Cup 1934, but his country didn't want to participate.

From whatever I've read about him, he was a brilliant stopper, Nasazzi was fast, strong and fantastic in air albeit with limited technical ability. So IMO he mashes really well with ball playing CB in Passarella.

Good luck @Tuppet
I think we should have the better CB pair and Amoros to me is better than Andrade both defensively and offensively.

I disagree with it, Amoros is probably better offensively, Andrade is a better man marker and is a better fit for my team to mark Henry closely and leave attacking completely to Mane, which is how he prefers it. Incidentally I found this one game Poland vs France, where Boniek was playing against Amoros for the third place in WC 1982, Boniek ended up assisting 1 and winning the freekick for the winning goal where Poland beat France 3-2.


Again this is a one off and I don't want to keep on it too much, but I would certainly be mindful that Amoros by no means has an easy job at hand.

I don't agree that Camacho is decent LB in Tuppet's description:

You don't get to be a decent LB to win this, be Real Madrid regular for 15 seasons and also win 81 caps for your country with EURO runner up place:

Camacho is the best LB in the 80's and certainly a match for Garrincha. Of course Djazic (who is one of the best left wingers as well) will beat him some times, but that goes for pretty much everybody in Tuppet's case even Maldini and of course Henry vs Andrade.

Well, I am not saying Camacho is Buttner ofcourse. At this level all the players are very good and have won a lot. But this as close to a mismatch as it get. Also don't agree that Maldini would be rinsed by Figo anywhere close to what Garrincha would do to Camacho. Your central defense would have to move wide to cover for him, which would give my attack more opportunities against your excellent central defense.

If anyone has not seen this -

 

[Tuppet]

@Tuppet Maldini doesn't really need the arrow there. Same mistake with Passarella, this time you have the proper LB next to him but why put him so high and with an arrow forward when it's Maldini and we know what he's capable of, while tagging him with a partner like Passarella would be perfect!

Two unbelievable teams. I want to say this will end 9-9

Probably don't read in arrow too much. The idea was Andrade is more defensive full back and Maldini would be more adventurous, just like in Milan where Tasotti was more defensive. It does not take away Maldini's defensive abilities. Also Passarella is not playing like a libero at all, he is a ball playing CB here.

 

[Enigma_87]

I can see that being a problem for many voters, while his pedigree is undisputed, people might wonder what kind of player he was so I am putting his write up here as well -


From whatever I've read about him, he was a brilliant stopper, Nasazzi was fast, strong and fantastic in air albeit with limited technical ability. So IMO he mashes really well with ball playing CB in Passarella.

Well it's a bit of a problem for me as well as little to know of him I'm not sure which were exactly his strong sides and most importantly his weak sides

From what I can see here:

http://xtraimmortal.blogspot.bg/2013/07/Defender.html

and here:

http://pesstatsdatabase.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8573

what has been discussed is that he's not particularly fast, which against Henry/Pele/Cruyff would be an issue.

just so that we're on the same page I'm not considering both sources above to be that accurate, just as I don't know about him I'm looking from various ones since to be fair I have no knowledge of Nasazzi.

I disagree with it, Amoros is probably better offensively, Andrade is a better man marker and is a better fit for my team to mark Henry closely and leave attacking completely to Mane, which is how he prefers it. Incidentally I found this one game Poland vs France, where Boniek was playing against Amoros for the third place in WC 1982, Boniek ended up assisting 1 and winning the freekick for the winning goal where Poland beat France 3-2.


Again this is a one off and I don't want to keep on it too much, but I would certainly be mindful that Amoros by no means has an easy job at hand.



Well, I am not saying Camacho is Buttner ofcourse. At this level all the players are very good and have won a lot. But this as close to a mismatch as it get. Also don't agree that Maldini would be rinsed by Figo anywhere close to what Garrincha would do to Camacho. Your central defense would have to move wide to cover for him, which would give my attack more opportunities against your excellent central defense.

If anyone has not seen this -

Amoros was as good defensively as he is offensively, it's a rare mixture of balance. I think he and Boniek are a good fit for that spot.

As for Camacho vs Garrincha - sure he'll get past him no saying he wont, but pretty much that is valid for both attacking assets. Camacho is the best man marker on the field and he has been recognized for that qualities. Figo is also a great player, for me if he was Brazillian he'll have won the same if not more than Garrincha's accolades. He'll rince Maldini as well during the games couple of times, the question is who will capitalize better.

 

[Gio]

Further to the Nasazzi fit points, I think that meshes quite well. Particularly because Nasazzi played alongside Da Guia who himself was not unlike Passarella for his tendency to get on the ball and dictate matters.

 

[Enigma_87]

Further to the Nasazzi fit points, I think that meshes quite well. Particularly because Nasazzi played alongside Da Guia who himself was not unlike Passarella for his tendency to get on the ball and dictate matters.

Aye from what I see they should fit in terms of playing styles.

From what I know of Passarella tho he's not the fastest of CB's around. He relies on his heading/reading of the game more. If Nasazzi is the same I can see Tuppet backline to be stretched by our pacy forwards.

For what is worth Baresi and Nesta are certainly faster than Passarella.

 

[Tuppet]

Well it's a bit of a problem for me as well as little to know of him I'm not sure which were exactly his strong sides and most importantly his weak sides

From what I can see here:

http://xtraimmortal.blogspot.bg/2013/07/Defender.html

and here:

http://pesstatsdatabase.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8573

what has been discussed is that he's not particularly fast, which against Henry/Pele/Cruyff would be an issue.

just so that we're on the same page I'm not considering both sources above to be that accurate, just as I don't know about him I'm looking from various ones since to be fair I have no knowledge of Nasazzi.

Sure mate, you should definitely look into more source material for Nasazzi. so in your first link I can see he is a stopper and ranked higher than the likes of Canavaro and Cafu. Now since he is partnered with a brilliant ball playing CB, I don't see there should be any problems with compatibility.

As for Camacho vs Garrincha - sure he'll get past him no saying he wont, but pretty much that is valid for both attacking assets. Camacho is the best man marker on the field and he has been recognized for that qualities. Figo is also a great player, for me if he was Brazillian he'll have won the same if not more than Garrincha's accolades. He'll rince Maldini as well during the games couple of times, the question is who will capitalize better.

Fair if you think that, but I do not agree at all that Figo would beat Maldini anywhere close enough to what Garrincha would do to Camacho. I mean we are talking about the best left back and best right winger in the history of football.

 

[Balu]

Further to the Nasazzi fit points, I think that meshes quite well. Particularly because Nasazzi played alongside Da Guia who himself was not unlike Passarella for his tendency to get on the ball and dictate matters.

I'm with you about Nasazzi being a good fit next to Passarella from what I know about him. But I always thought of Da Guia as a more stopper like defender as well? I admit I don't know all that much about him of course. How much did they actually play together by the way? As far as I remember, Da Guia had a really short spell at Nacional early in his career where he played with an already past his peak Nasazzi for a season, that's it.

 

[Enigma_87]

To underline a bit his is how explosive Pele was when he got the ball:

Sure mate, you should definitely look into more source material for Nasazzi. so in your first link I can see he is a stopper and ranked higher than the likes of Canavaro and Cafu. Now since he is partnered with a brilliant ball playing CB, I don't see there should be any problems with compatibility.

I'm with you on great stopper/sweeper partnerships, that's the main reason why picked Ruggeri from the start. What I'm not sure is how they will fare with fast explosive strikers as a team because we have 3 of them in our team.

Baresi for example there is a decent amount of videos having his own against Romario, MvB and the rest. But also he has a bit more pace compared to Passarella, and to be fair from what I see from Nasazzi as well.

Your partnership seems excellent on the air but our main game will be moving around in attack and playing the ball on the ground. This is one of the reason why (even if we had the chance to pick Giggs) we would go with Henry and his goalscoring abilities when running into channels. Both are capable of that but Henry is the better finisher, which in a tight game is crucial.

Fair if you think that, but I do not agree at all that Figo would beat Maldini anywhere close enough to what Garrincha would do to Camacho. I mean we are talking about the best left back and best right winger in the history of football.

Well Figo is right up there in terms of best right wingers IMO as well. Not many wingers have won the Ballon D'or and won 8 championships in different countries. Again I think both will get their fair chance in the game but Camacho is no mug he'll chase Garrincha like a mad man. Not many defensively better full backs than him(one is in your team and the other is Vogts IMO).

 

[Physiocrat]

Poll added.

Thanks

 

[Tuppet]

Right. Pele hmm well not much you can do about him can you now ? but I don't see the whole Pele - Cruyff - Henry situation as optimal. You have 3 forwards who love to drop deep, and your attack is decidedly central. There is a chance that it could be all be a clusterfeck in which Henry find himself cutting in with 2 forwards already there and Pele Cruyff coming into each other's ways all the time. As I've mentioned Pele even at his goalscoring best in 1958 world cup was never a lone striker it was Vava his striker partner who used to play up with Pele dropping deep.

Also lets not forget about my midfield, Neeskens and Matthaus are 2 of the best midfielders of all time, and would make it really hard for Cruyff to dictate the game. While I don't think Keane - Effenberg combo would be anywhere near as effective on Di Stefano. While Garrincha is stretching your defense causing Baresi to cover him, lets not forget the best pure number 9 on the pitch. There is nothing more deadly in football than a team set up to supply Der Bomber with chances -

 

[Enigma_87]

Right. Pele hmm well not much you can do about him can you now ? but I don't see the whole Pele - Cruyff - Henry situation as optimal. You have 3 forwards who love to drop deep, and your attack is decidedly central. There is a chance that it could be all be a clusterfeck in which Henry find himself cutting in with 2 forwards already there and Pele Cruyff coming into each other's ways all the time. As I've mentioned Pele even at his goalscoring best in 1958 world cup was never a lone striker it was Vava his striker partner who used to play up with Pele dropping deep.

Also lets not forget about my midfield, Neeskens and Matthaus are 2 of the best midfielders of all time, and would make it really hard for Cruyff to dictate the game. While I don't think Keane - Effenberg combo would be anywhere near as effective on Di Stefano. While Garrincha is stretching your defense causing Baresi to cover him, lets not forget the best pure number 9 on the pitch. There is nothing more deadly in football than a team set up to supply Der Bomber with chances -

I don't think Henry/Pele/Cruyff would be an issue at all. Cruyff likes to drop deep to get the ball, but deeper than Pele ever gets it. Henry loves to be on the left side and cut in, just like he's asked for this game. Pele also likes to move to confuse opponent and get the ball. Three of them are one of the most intelligent fooballers on the pitch, especially Cruyff whose vision is bar none.

Effenberg/Keane IMO is an excellent combo in terms of how well they will work together. Matthaus obviously has an edge over Effenberg, but so has Keane to Neeskens especially in this role. For one I like Keane's chances against Di Stefano a bit better than Neeskens against Cruyff.

Pele having another clinical striker to combine with in Henry is what works for him best as you mentioned, that's another reason why we paired him with Henry and not Giggs, who won't be able to support him the way Henry can.

Muller is a top top striker and one of the best in history, but certainly Pele is better in both engaging the defence and also the ability to engage more than one player most of the time. Put that in combination with Cruyff and Henry running into channels and both deadly finishers and I think we can score a few this game

 

[Gio]

I'm with you about Nasazzi being a good fit next to Passarella from what I know about him. But I always thought of Da Guia as a more stopper like defender as well? I admit I don't know all that much about him of course. How much did they actually play together by the way? As far as I remember, Da Guia had a really short spell at Nacional early in his career where he played with an already past his peak Nasazzi for a season, that's it.

In the darkness of a lack of footage, attempting to get a real handle on Da Guia's style of play is tricky. But from what I've read he was an all-rounder: both a solid defender and expansive (for the time at least) on the ball. As a general rule, most of the defenders and old centre/left/right-halves from the 1920s and 1930s who still have some form of legacy can attribute that to their relatively unique ability on the ball. At the time that extra bit of class is what made many of them stand out. And it was usually combined with the more standard physical qualities.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Not many defensively better full backs than him(one is in your team and the other is Vogts IMO).

Nilton, Facchetti, Marzolini, Schnellinger? Djalma, Thuram, Carlos Alberto?

 

[Enigma_87]

Nilton, Facchetti, Marzolini, Schnellinger? Djalma, Thuram, Carlos Alberto?

I meant defensively. Thuram I'd always think is better centrally than RB.

 

[harms]

I meant defensively. Thuram I'd always think is better centrally than RB.

Everyone from Edgar's list is better than Camacho defensively. You're seriously overrating him

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

I meant defensively. Thuram I'd always think is better centrally than RB.

Tbh, I'd rather have any of those I listed (LBs) over Camacho whilst facing Garrincha. He certainly is a classy player, but those are better than him. And by playing a defensive LB you may be conceding the entire wing and deny Henry of some service. Don't really see the need to play a defensive LB just because it is Garrincha.

If you are ranking LBs all time, I'd rate Camacho around 7-9.

 

[Enigma_87]

Everyone from Edgar's list is better than Camacho defensively. You're seriously overrating him

I wouldn't agree on CA(overall sure, but he's more attacking minded), Marzolini I'm not sure because I don't know enough of him, Facchetti, Djalma I agree.

Tbh, I'd rather have any of those I listed (LBs) over Camacho whilst facing Garrincha. He certainly is a classy player, but those are better than him. And by playing a defensive LB you may be conceding the entire wing and deny Henry of some service. Don't really see the need to play a defensive LB just because it is Garrincha.

If you are ranking LBs all time, I'd rate Camacho around 7-9.

Camacho has attacking contribution as well, sure he's no Carlos Alberto or R. Carlos but still he's no mug either. I agree with your ranking which is still not bad and surely match for any winger. Of course I'm not expecting him to shut Garrincha completely down.

 

[MJJ]

One thing that hasnt been raised so far, does anyone thing di stefano and garrincha will clash? Given what we know of the personalities of both, I dont think di stefano is going to much prefer playing with someone who is considered on par with him and has a vastly different playing style.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

I dont think di stefano is going to much prefer playing with someone who is considered on par with him

Why? He did play with Puskas and Kopa. I certainly don't see these two clashing.

 

[MJJ]

Why? He did play with Puskas, Kopa and Hidegkuti. I certainly don't see these two clashing.

Wasnt puskas past his prime then and more of a poacher? Am thinking of what happened with didi. From what I know of Kopa, he wasnt the type to dominate the ball nearly as much as garrincha and dont know anything about higegkuti so wont comment on him.

 

[harms]

Why? He did play with Puskas, Kopa and Hidegkuti. I certainly don't see these two clashing.

He played with Hidegkuti?

 

[Balu]

I don't think Hidegkuti ever left Hungary. Kopa was a dominant CM/AM, not too different to Didi. In general I'd say that Di Stefano struggled to share the middle with other true playmakers but didn't have a problem with wingers, so I don't see it as a potential problem.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

He played with Hidegkuti?

Not unless he did so in an unofficial capacity of some kind, like the Puskas-Charles affair we talked about the other day.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

He played with Hidegkuti?

No. My mistake. I was meaning to type Gento.

 

[MJJ]

I don't think Hidegkuti ever left Hungary. Kopa was a dominant CM/AM, not too different to Didi. In general I'd say that Di Stefano struggled to share the middle with other true playmakers but didn't have a problem with wingers, so I don't see it as a potential problem.

I dont think many wingers are as demanding of the ball as garrincha though.

 

[Enigma_87]

Wasnt puskas past his prime then and more of a poacher? Am thinking of what happened with didi. From what I know of Kopa, he wasnt the type to dominate the ball nearly as much as garrincha and dont know anything about higegkuti so wont comment on him.

Aye, at Real he was more of a goal poacher and put a few pounds, a bit different role to what he was before that.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Sometimes these asymmetrical formations are just confusing. Is Enigma playing a 4-2-4, a la Brazil 1970? or is it a 4-2-3-1?