Fantasy Tournament: World Cup All-Time All-Stars

[Annahnomoss]

I think playing a player in the right position isn't really what is important it is playing a player in his right role. You can play Zidane on the left which is "his right position" but if you then state he is supposed to hug the side-line all game then you are still using him wrong.

Positions doesn't mean a lot really considering there are hundreds footballing styles and like 20 positions. Forlan was being played as a left-winger the entire tournament but he was neatly always portrayed as someone who cuts in.

Nobody had a problem with it, nor should they. Even if in reality Forlan was nothing at all like a left winger and his average position was that of a second striker.

@Pippa I also add this to that winger description. "The three will have free roles in the offense – the wingers will then track Carlos/Alberto in the defense." I think a free-roled winger is a pretty fair description of him and Ronaldinho.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Wwhere did you get that image from?

I made that myself - it's how I remember that team: Three strikers, more or less. Both Stoichkov and Kostadinov were more of the "wide forward" type, with Sirakov in the middle. If you look at this, for instance:

http://www.planetworldcup.com/CUPS/1994/qf_ger_v_bul.html

those three are listed as "forwards" in what is basically a 4-3-3 formation. But I've seen the same team set up in 3-5-2 formation as well, with Sirakov in something approaching an AM role. That makes no sense to me, as I remember him as a striker - as in, a goal scoring striker, not some sort of playmaker. Other sources again list Stoichkov as the AM in a 3-5-2 (with Sirakov and Kostadinov up front), which makes more sense - but still doesn't seem quite right to me. If you are to make the 3-5-2 fly at all you need to define Yankov as a centrehalf - not a DM (which he is normally regarded as). I have even seen the formation described as a 4-4-2, which doesn't make much sense at all.

Part of the explanation is undoubtedly that they did indeed play a somewhat loose formation - and, not least, that if you get hold of graphics from 1994 these may very well show a 3-5-2 or a 4-4-2 for teams that didn't actually conform to such formations - they were simply well known default formations, as it were.

I don't trust my memory, be it said - and I definitely won't claim that Stoichkov operated as a winger in anything approaching the traditional sense. I would maintain, though, that Bulgaria played with three forwards and that Sirakov was the central one. It wasn't a rigid formation - and Stoichkov, being the main man and the star player, had a rather free role within the set-up.

EDIT I came across a tactics forum the other day that I can't find - I'll provide a link if I do. Anyway, there was a (Bulgarian, I'd guess) poster there who put the Bulgaria formation across as something like a latter day Barca set-up: Three man midfield and a fluid trio up front. That makes sense to me, actually. What was Messi's role in that side before he moved centrally? Perhaps not too far from the sort of goal scoring winger/free roamer/wide forward we're talking about here in the shape of The Dagger.

 

[antohan]

I don't trust my memory, be it said - and I definitely won't claim that Stoichkov operated as a winger in anything approaching the traditional sense. I would maintain, though, that Bulgaria played with three forwards and that Sirakov was the central one. It wasn't a rigid formation - and Stoichkov, being the main man and the star player, had a rather free role within the set-up.

It was an underdog side largely relying on their star to put together a great campaign, any notion that could be achieved with him having anything but a free role is counterintuitive. Just look at the first and third goal below, both clearly indicate no set position, and very much the sort of runs you would expect from Stoichkov, wherever he notionally would be in a starting lineup.

 

[Balu]

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?

I would trust Kicker more than any other source when you look for the German formations, but even then I found a few questionable line-ups during my research for the world cup draft. Highly doubt they get it right for the opponent every time, but basically no source for line-ups does.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Just to add to the Stoichkov debate - and I stress that this is strictly speaking irrelevant as the draft was all about WC performances, but still, if we're discussing his suitability I think it merits mention:

Barca prior to Romario's arrival:

http://santapelota.wordpress.com/page/2/

(scroll down a fair ways to see the comments on the Dream Team. The whole thing is interesting and worth a read if you're a bit of a nerd).

Now, the famous 1994 final when Barca got their sweet behinds handed to them by Milan:

Milan look like Sunderland, but we see that Stoichkov and Begiristain have now switched sides - the latter playing on the left, which was his main position.

Now, regarding illustrations dating back a while: it is not uncommon to ignore the true nature of such formations and simply portray the team as lining up - in the first case - with Laudrup as an attacking midfielder behind what appears to be a pair of strikers. It clearly doesn't represent the roles of Stoichkov and Begiristain well enough - as both players had a wide side (and a wild side) to their natural game which was exploited in this set-up.

Anyway, what is so striking about that 1994 formation is how similar it is to the latter day Barca of Pep Guardiola. A formation from, say, the CL final in 2009 would look very much the same, with Henry and Messi in the wide forward (not winger!) roles and Eto'o in place of Romario.

 

[antohan]

What's the deal with Bakero in the first one? Did he run around with a roof on his head?

 

[Chesterlestreet]

What's the deal with Bakero in the first one? Did he run around with a roof on his head?

I have no idea. Perhaps he played with one of them hat-umbrellas on his head, only really large, so he could use it as a battering ram of sorts to pave the way for his team mates. Arrows are generally a bit shite, if you ask me, unless they add something truly original - er, which this might do, in fairness.

I see illustrations adding a fecking arrow in front of Cafu, as though anyone expected him to tuck in and work like a common dog.