Last edited:
Fantasy Tournament: World Cup All-Time All-Stars
- Thread starter Polaroid
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
I can't be in the coming draft guys I am sorry! Thought it wouldn't start for a while.
In my opinion, I thought that the idea of using Stoichkov as a right winger and for people to assume that he would provide width - as most of the time he is falsely represented as a winger in his prime - could have very easily been called out on. Bulgaria played a 4-4-2/3-5-2 for the span of the World Cup, with the wide players providing width.
Stoichkov is sort of a natural left-sided player (I've never seen him play in Bulgaria) but he was the type of player that insisted on attacking through central areas. If there was a modern-day footballer to compare his tendencies and attacking movement with, it would almost certainly be Cristiano Ronaldo.
I just thought that it was interesting how it was never called out on, especially when he was played as a right winger. He played nothing of the sort and a couple of posters thought he was the type of footballer to play as a touchline winger at times with their comments. I can understand the logic of him cutting onto his stronger left foot but that's besides the point...
I don't really have a problem with it, it's just that the fiasco about players not in position or them not being in a proper setup comes to mind. You had a brilliant team, by the way. You'd literally have to pick at feathers to downplay the options you had.
I would be interested in playing this new type of draft style if there is space available, @AldoPaine18
Stoichkov is sort of a natural left-sided player (I've never seen him play in Bulgaria) but he was the type of player that insisted on attacking through central areas. If there was a modern-day footballer to compare his tendencies and attacking movement with, it would almost certainly be Cristiano Ronaldo.
I just thought that it was interesting how it was never called out on, especially when he was played as a right winger. He played nothing of the sort and a couple of posters thought he was the type of footballer to play as a touchline winger at times with their comments. I can understand the logic of him cutting onto his stronger left foot but that's besides the point...
I don't really have a problem with it, it's just that the fiasco about players not in position or them not being in a proper setup comes to mind. You had a brilliant team, by the way. You'd literally have to pick at feathers to downplay the options you had.
I would be interested in playing this new type of draft style if there is space available, @AldoPaine18
List updated.
I get you mate, I made the same comparison to Ronaldo in the first game I believe - I think they were very similar in style. But like you said, a lot of people assumed he'd play as an out-and-out winger. I made him a right attacking midfielder to try and depict the fact that he wasn't that prone of going wide. I think I only forgot to name positions in the final.
Stoichkov played as a second striker/Playmaker and on both wings. His style of play was mainly to find a free space to receive the pass - explode towards goal wherever he currently was.
In Bulgaria he had the exact same role for his team, find free space - receive a ball and explode towards goal. Even if he was a second striker/striker he drifted all across the pitch to find free space.
He wasn't better or worse because the free space was central, left or right - it didn't affect him much at all.
The main difference between Ronaldo and Stoichkov was that Stoichkov was known as the best crosser in the game when he played. So even if the central pathways were blocked and his run was deflected wide - it suited him great anyhow as he had the dribbling and crossing to be effective from there too.
Thanks for counting me in and for organising it Aldo, it certainly brings a refreshing spin to draft games:-)
I also have another idea btw, it has each manager being given a pot of transfer funds and bidding for players
Incidentally I have played that one as well.I also have another idea btw, it has each manager being given a pot of transfer funds and bidding for players
We call it an Auction Draft. I really suck at managing funds.
We aiming for 16 Aldo?
That sounds good as well!I also have another idea btw, it has each manager being given a pot of transfer funds and bidding for players
Yep, TITO.
And I thought I would be the pioneerIncidentally I have played that one as well.
We call it an Auction Draft. I really suck at managing funds.
We can try it after the sheep draft, worth seeing who overpays for a carroll and who picks up a cantona
Aldo perhaps starting a new thread for it will result more entries?
Yeah will do it in a while.
100 pages, yay!
Is Pippa promoted ?
Ofc that's how he is posting here
How in lords name did he get promoted with 100 posts. Talk about brilliant newbie-poster. I've only seen great posts whenever he has been making messages through Crappy so it is understandable though.
It's probably a reflection that Anto was doing the majority of the calling out of in-game issues, but his major (and justified) hard-on for Barca Stoichkov made it less likely for him to do so.
Congrats to Annah by the way: hard to conceive of a stronger midfield and strikeforce spine.
Maybe this lanman fellah can fill you in on the relative advantages and disadvantages? I think it's far better this way. See below, straight after reporting stage 1 picks.
That's the second attempt of the same round.Maybe this lanman fellah can fill you in on the relative advantages and disadvantages? I think it's far better this way. See below, straight after reporting stage 1 picks.
We cleared that early on re: attacking positions being more flexible as you need to recognise how frontlines have evolved from W, to M, to pairs to lone man upfront. Ultimately, if it was a misfit it would be obvious (e.g. no one liked Hagi on the wing, it wasn't about being out of position, just not seeing him being anywhere near as good).I think it's interesting that in a draft where much of the points centred on positions and "how to get the best out of your players", not a single word was brought up about Stoichkov being played out of position through the entire draft; he of course played as a second striker for Bulgaria in 1994.
And hello everyone.
If you actually watch Stoichkov's goals many of them were very much what could be expected of him as a wide player. And he was supposed to be showing up as a second striker. That's the beauty of Stoichkov, stick him on the wing or wherever you like, he will just find exactly where he should be to most hurt the opposition.
I never for one minute saw him as a line-hugging winger. I even pointed out I thought that was a defensive wing, the penetration would happen at the other end and Stoichkov would rip a new one into Bobby Carlos at the far post (very much second striker type stuff). In fact, I can see an overhead kick attempt or two
(from Bobby I mean)Watch the post immediately after! That's the entire point, after reporting first attempts they already gave the next question so people had something to keep themselves entertained and didn't get antsy. It effectively means that, by the time of the deadline, the question has been out in the open for three days. Plenty of time to do the legwork, no excuses for missing deadlines, etc.
I don't think there was any need for a call-out with Stoichkov. For my money he would clearly work more than fine in that role. Second striker, schmecond schmiker - he habitually played wide-ish, cut in from a wide position, even provided crosses from out wide (and brilliant ones too). So, if the issue is whether Annah used him out of position, I'd say: nay, he didn't. And that goes for Bulgaria '94 too. They didn't play a rigid formation. You could even claim they sported a 4-3-3/3-4-3 of sorts - which was very much the new thing in town at the time. Stoichkov and Kostadinov as wide forwards or whatever you want to call it.
Thanks a lot mate! The damn restrictions proved to be a nightmare in the end but otherwise Cafu-Moore-Maldini-Facchetti would be playing in that defense!
I think at the end of the day the restrictions turned it slightly too much about luck. I'd say the draft would have been better with 2 out of those 3 restrictions(WC/Continent/Pre 72).
I disagree about the restrictions, they were fine and if you got in trouble it was your own doing. If they stopped you fielding Cafú as eye candy in a game where Lahm was more than enough, I'd say all the better. Way too many cracking players get tossed aside for no good footballing reason, if restrictions help prevent it I'm all for them.
I disagree with that. You could play him on the left side, because he has experience playing from the left. But at the World Cup in 1994 he strictly played in the middle, almost like how he was playing for Barça during 1992-1994. His best form came playing through the centre, where in the 1993-94 season he struck up a great partnership with Romário. There was a comparison of each Barça "dream team" and their formations, this is how the 1991-92 European Cup winning Barça side was depicted:
The thing that I see is that Stoichkov was regularly depicted as a "winger" who was able to cut in. Someone said that he and Roberto Carlos would be facing each other on the wing as if it was a wing-fullback duel, when it would be nothing like that. For example, Annahnomoss called Stoichkov "one of the highest scoring wingers in WC history" here, when in reality he wasn't a winger at all during the World Cup.
He was recognised as a "forward", mostly as a centre forward. I don't even think it is questionable whether you could debate the position he played and convince someone who saw Bulgaria play that Stoichkov would play from the right wing. From sources at the time, they recognised a partnership that he had with Kostadinov as centre forwards, not wide forwards as you suggest. I didn't want to take a lot of time looking through archives so I found a couple of pieces from the time to solidify my point:
MD: July 16, 1994
Look at Bulgaria's player list throughout, a clear division of the front two in every knock-out stage match - Kostadinov, Stoichkov. I resized the image from 3200x4096, so it might be a tad blurry.
They make their own "Best 11" before the semi-finals. Surprised Baggio and a couple others weren't in there when I first saw it, but it's their (biased) opinion. Stoichkov did not make their ideal eleven players, but he was an honourable choice as a centre forward.
A piece written on the day of the round of 16 match between Mexico and Bulgaria. I'll quote a direct excerpt from that article.
Up front, Hristo Stoichkov, a star for the Spanish league champion Barcelona, is always dangerous, and the Mexicans' well-coordinated defense will be stretched and strained trying to contain him. His partner, Emil Kostadinov, has been less impressive so far.
Stoichkov played all along the front three and even as a second striker. His position didn't matter much like United playing Cristiano as a striker didn't change how he played a lot either. What is more important is where their teammates were, because they'd of course most often find the open space where there was no team mate.
Cristiano would still find space left in one attack as if he was a left-winger, the next he'd surge out wide right etc. They seek space/weakness in the defense and they use it with explosive runs.
I tried to always get this fact through but that statement is way too shady I must agree. It isn't easy making 20 Stoichkov statements if you don't want to get twisted in the complexity of the above.
What I really meant was of course that he is a "winger" - and out of all the wingers in history - he is one of those who managed to score most goals in a WC.
Wasn't trying to proclaim that he played as a winger in the WC, hard to say that sentence though in a clear manner. Still can't quite get it right without a very big post.
Stoichkov played a free role in the World Cup, he found free space and ran for it. His defensive role included so much work-rate and running that it is hard to define it as the work of a striker. For me that is what truly makes him so hard to put a name on.
In the World-Cup he was a free-roled attacker in the offense, but still extremely important and hard-working in the defense. What is the name for this position? I don't think there really is one and that is why we are here discussing it.
There just hasn't been a lot of players doing this role so there is no name for it. Whatever we say it ends up flawed.
Cristiano would still find space left in one attack as if he was a left-winger, the next he'd surge out wide right etc. They seek space/weakness in the defense and they use it with explosive runs.
I tried to always get this fact through but that statement is way too shady I must agree. It isn't easy making 20 Stoichkov statements if you don't want to get twisted in the complexity of the above.
What I really meant was of course that he is a "winger" - and out of all the wingers in history - he is one of those who managed to score most goals in a WC.
Wasn't trying to proclaim that he played as a winger in the WC, hard to say that sentence though in a clear manner. Still can't quite get it right without a very big post.
Stoichkov played a free role in the World Cup, he found free space and ran for it. His defensive role included so much work-rate and running that it is hard to define it as the work of a striker. For me that is what truly makes him so hard to put a name on.
In the World-Cup he was a free-roled attacker in the offense, but still extremely important and hard-working in the defense. What is the name for this position? I don't think there really is one and that is why we are here discussing it.
There just hasn't been a lot of players doing this role so there is no name for it. Whatever we say it ends up flawed.
Free-role, I'd somewhat agree. But should he ever be put on the right? No. Should he ever be described as a winger? No. Should there ever be qualms about fullback-Stoichkov confrontations? No. I mean, even on his legends page on the Barça site he is described as a player who could play on the left and in the middle. When Txiki was breaking through, Stoichkov was played as a second striker. He had a great strike partnership with Romário in 93-94, not as a winger, but as a second striker. You say that Stoichkov had a great partnership with Ronaldo, when it was nothing of the sort. Maybe you got it mixed up with Romário, but during that season Stoichkov was clearly on the decline. I'm not sure if you watched them play, but there was no real partnership that could even be worth mentioning. He played only 1120 minutes in the 96-97 La Liga season, and much less of it was without Ronaldo.
I wouldn't say "of course he is a winger". I mean, he's just as much of a "winger" as Cristiano has been for the past 4 years or so, which just isn't true. Almost all of Stoichkov's danger came through the middle. His best form came through playing in the centre. He won European Footballer of the Year in a season where he played almost exclusively as a partner with Romário, and as a nominal centre forward for Bulgaria. You posted something about Stoichkov being a "wide forward known for explosive acceleration [...]", where did you retrieve that sort of information?
Stoichkov's nominal position was clearly in the middle. That much can be attested to by several sources, both at the time of the World Cup (as I have already shown) and retrospectively. Is there any documentation of any sort that Stoichkov was playing on the right? I make sure to say "on the right" because your team picture has him from there, as if he was starting from that position in USA 1994. If you were going to depict movement in your team pictures, surely you could have done it with arrows? I don't want to look through every match, but I recall Theon had the arrows for Roberto Carlos, Polaroid had arrows stretching everywhere for Boniek - to clearly depict a "free role" - and Balu had arrows everywhere on his pictures. It's to show movement.
Is there an argument against Stoichkov not being a centre forward in the World Cup? I personally don't think so. Mandzukic regularly drifts deep and out wide, yet he is always labeled as a centre forward in Bayern matches. The likes of Hazard and Ribéry have free roles (Ribéry especially) but are labeled almost exclusively as left wingers. What's the difference with Stoichkov? He was a nominal centre forward, he should have been called that.
Is there really any point in continuing this? I don't really think so. I just had a bone to pick with that, especially when Hagi was made to look ineffective from the left earlier in the draft. No worries, though. Good discussion
I wouldn't say "of course he is a winger". I mean, he's just as much of a "winger" as Cristiano has been for the past 4 years or so, which just isn't true. Almost all of Stoichkov's danger came through the middle. His best form came through playing in the centre. He won European Footballer of the Year in a season where he played almost exclusively as a partner with Romário, and as a nominal centre forward for Bulgaria. You posted something about Stoichkov being a "wide forward known for explosive acceleration [...]", where did you retrieve that sort of information?
Stoichkov's nominal position was clearly in the middle. That much can be attested to by several sources, both at the time of the World Cup (as I have already shown) and retrospectively. Is there any documentation of any sort that Stoichkov was playing on the right? I make sure to say "on the right" because your team picture has him from there, as if he was starting from that position in USA 1994. If you were going to depict movement in your team pictures, surely you could have done it with arrows? I don't want to look through every match, but I recall Theon had the arrows for Roberto Carlos, Polaroid had arrows stretching everywhere for Boniek - to clearly depict a "free role" - and Balu had arrows everywhere on his pictures. It's to show movement.
Is there an argument against Stoichkov not being a centre forward in the World Cup? I personally don't think so. Mandzukic regularly drifts deep and out wide, yet he is always labeled as a centre forward in Bayern matches. The likes of Hazard and Ribéry have free roles (Ribéry especially) but are labeled almost exclusively as left wingers. What's the difference with Stoichkov? He was a nominal centre forward, he should have been called that.
Is there really any point in continuing this? I don't really think so. I just had a bone to pick with that, especially when Hagi was made to look ineffective from the left earlier in the draft. No worries, though. Good discussion
You have a point pippa. Different players get judged with different parameters. I thought it was funny how in the semi with Pol, all discussion was on Garrincha and nothing on Maradona and then in the final everyone was crying as to why Diego was not picked.
The point about Hagi and Zidane is also good since in the previous match many said Zidane should playing in the middle and not on left.
The point about Hagi and Zidane is also good since in the previous match many said Zidane should playing in the middle and not on left.
Don't ever make that point in the Cristiano Ronaldo thread
. You'll regret it. You get stick instantly because Cristiano scores so many goals 'despite' being a winger and therefore already surpassed all the great goalscoring strikers with ease. It's not worth the fight.If you have Rummenigge in the team, you face a similar problem. Often positioned as a winger, when he usually was a wide forward/2nd striker who played off a central striker in a asymmetrical system. I actually liked Stoichkov in that role in Annah's team, he just called him wrongly almost throughout the whole draft. I almost picked Stoichkov as a 4th round pick in the beginning, would have loved him as the left sided wide forward with Cruyff in the false 9 role. But Davids made more sense towards that all Dutch midfield and a post '72 European 'winger' would have hurt a lot with the restrictions later. But I really hated that I missed out on Stoichkov, he would have been perfect.
The famous QF against Germany in 1994.
Ronaldo/Stoichkov are not playing the same role as a striker - or anything near it. I think it is easier to argue for their playing style being a "kind of winger" than a striker.Don't ever make that point in the Cristiano Ronaldo thread
I think it just turns into a war of definitions to go in depth with it, a player playing Ronaldo's role is certainly expected to score less than a player being the striker.
I think this is more about modern football, there are no wingers anymore in the top clubs bar a rare few. So the term winger has been adjusted as well to fit in to the way modern players use their LAM/RAM/RW/LW players.
If Nani scores 15 goals next season from a LW/LAM position, we'd all be going crazy celebrating our title victory. If Rooney scores 15 goals as a striker we won't really give a shit.
So that just shows that 1 goal for a player in "that winger role" is much more rare and harder than a goal from a striker like Messi.
Comparing Nani's role at United with Ronaldo's role at Real makes no sense. Ronaldo usually stays further up the pitch than Benzema, the whole team in the last years was setup to get Ronaldo at the end of the final ball, which made sense because you want the player with the best finishing ability there, not Benzema. Özil was mainly drifting to the right, Benzema was dragging defenders out of position and Ronaldo made those brilliant runs behind the defense. Ronaldo was nothing like a winger and that has nothing to do with modern football. There were 2nd strikers/wide forwards who played off a central striker in every decade and a lot of them were the main goalscorer in their team. Cristiano is probably the best out of them all, but it's still a role that is closer to a forward/striker than to a winger. Just like it was with Stoichkov and Rummenigge.
Yeah, to use a FM term, he is a wing forward.
It's a bit of a fallacy that Ronaldo, or Messi for that matter, score so many goals despite being a winger/second striker/whatever. Both of their teams are built around getting the maximum number of goals out of them. Ronaldo is a free-roaming goalscorer who has zero defensive responsibilities and whose average position on the park is as high as any centre-forward. The same thing applies about Messi being a 'false no9' - there's nothing false about a no9 who nets 91 goals in a year, and for Barcelona it's all about maximising his goal return.
Yeah and I think Barca has suffered as a result. Their last two CL exits are testament to this. Against Chelsea they had no plans to break down Chelsea other than passing to Messi. Against Bayern, with an inured Messi they were made to look like a pub team.
Wwhere did you get that image from? Because Kicker had a different variant of that team, as well as the New York Times, Mundo Deportivo, and ABC. They all viewed Stoichkov as a centre forward, not as a left winger as that image depicts. And on the topic of Kicker, I would only assume that they would provide accurate summaries of the matches of the German National Team, considering how they have been described as "Germany's leading sports magazine" - I would have to ask @Balu for a confirmation? Anyways, they called it a partnership between Stoichkov and Kostadinov.
In a preview to the quarter-final against Germany, Carlos Bonelli of MD claimed that it was a partnership of Stoichkov and Kostadinov up front, and not as a front three with Sirakov as the image you posted suggests. I'll do a quick translation into English, if you want to read the full Spanish article (titled Hristo Stoichkov, the obsession of Vogts) just click on the link and it will direct you to the original.
"The presence of veteran centre forward Rudi Völler against Bulgaria was confirmed by Vogts [...] The big concern of the German coach is the presence of the Bulgarian duo Hristo Stoichkov and Emil Kostadinov."
"[...] But Berti Vogts prepares a 'battleship' to stop Stoichkov and Kostadinov. The defence will consist of Berthold and Wagner on the sides, Helmer and Kohler in the middle, and Matthäus as the free man."
"[...] But Berti Vogts prepares a 'battleship' to stop Stoichkov and Kostadinov. The defence will consist of Berthold and Wagner on the sides, Helmer and Kohler in the middle, and Matthäus as the free man."
And just to finish off, here is the Spanish match report - with formation - after the match, courtesy of ABC.
I couldn't bother looking at group stages when I would probably see the same thing as the important knock-out stage rounds. The "4-3-3" against Italy looks interesting, because it looks like Sirakov is in the hole. From what I remember, the wingbacks and wide midfielders provided much of the width whereas Stoichkov provided the creativity through the middle. I don't think there would be a major issue with putting Stoichkov on the left, because from what I have read he was known as a free-scoring left winger in Bulgaria. He has experience at the position, most definitely. The issue to me is that Hagi was seen as someone ineffective playing from the left, which I thought was absurd considering he actually played FROM the left wing in some matches for Romania.
I think that term is very good, even then I'd like to add free roled-wing forward to highlight how they no matter where you place them will appear in the "holes" of the enemy defense.
If you play Stoichkov/Ronaldo on a wing you don't need more width provided there except from a full-back. So tactically I think what they provided was way more than a goal-scoring striker does. If a striker scores 25 goals, and someone in Stoichkov/Ronaldo's role score 25 goals and also provide width - then I'd certainly rate the latter two as having a more successful season. Unless the striker also takes on another role apart from being a goal-scorer, I.e is the team's main play maker and so on.
So they provide width very well, which of course is natural as Stoichkov was known as maybe the best crosser of his days. Something he did when he provided width.
I also think Hagi's critique was more due to his playing style rather than him having played in that position. If I remember correctly, I haven't double checked this at all. I think people just considered him and Zidane to not be a partnership that would turn each other better but instead may try to do the same job.
Last edited:
This, it was about Hagi and Zidane as a combo, not about Hagi being out of position.