Mike's Sheep Draft SF - Indnyc vs. Jim

[Michaelf7777777]

Indnyc Tactics

Switch to a 3-5-2 attacking formation. Ronaldo joins Muller upfront to make a devastating attack. Cafu and Lizarazu switch to wing back positions to provide width

Tony Dunne comes back in to play as left sided centerback. He often played as a center back particularly for Ireland and is good cover here

Jim Tactics

Tactics: 4-4-2;

Strategy: Stay compact, well-organized at all time, making it extremely hard to break in the defensive phase. Shut down the middle of the park, make the opponent work through the flanks and more importantly cut Müller and Ronaldo from the service forcing Ronaldo to go deeper for the ball.

Play directly and use the wings to make the pitch as big as possible. Use the genius of Beckenbauer to full extent in the attack whether it is about attacking fast and directly or providing a more calming influence for the team if needed.

Players mentality: Determined, resolute or as the great man said once said:

“I often use the word horny with my players.”

After putting pretty much the last touch on my defence with Alessandro Costacurta providing a great defensive unit for Beckenbauer to influence the match in both phasis of the game, that defensive unit is now shielded in what was probably the greatest DM (and much more) in Frank Rijkaard.

The fact that he will go into that very match with one of the greatest box-to-box midfielders in Johan Neeskens makes this midfield a nightmare to play against.

On the right side, the trickery, dribbling skills and goalscoring ability of Jinky will add another dimension to the attack.

The game itself:
- Indy has a lot of quality and GOAT allure all around too, but think as a team and collective unit I have an advantage (as all mine are in complimentary pairings and system)

 

[Michaelf7777777]

@Indnyc @Jim Beam

 

[harms]

I don’t like that Hansen-Giles combo on the right. If it was a more suited center back there or a Davids-like midfielder there, it would’ve been better. I’d probably swap Passarella and Hansen and limit him in terms of his offensive contribution. The front line looks ridiculous, even though an all-time great playmaker somewhere would’ve improved it even further.

edit: especially since all three of Facchetti/Barnes & Puskás are going to be lurking around.

On the other hand — what an insane midfield duo from Jim! On its own I'd say that the Costacurta-Kaiser pair isn't well-suited to deal with Indnyc' attacking force, but that midfield base helps a lot. Still, there's no way that Müller & Ronaldo don't score at least once.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Feckedenbauer

If Indnyc had half decent wide CB's in an all time context, this would have been his game.

Even Giles-Davids is okay for me in a back 5

Shit teams in general considering what they will face in the finals. Liverpool this season in the league all over again.

 

[Gio]

Not sure about Dunne here. I'd have thought Passarella (v Charles) and Hansen (v Puskas) match up stylistically well while Lizarazu and Cafu have solid cases to cancel out the wingers. That said I like the Davids/Giles combo as a reprise of Bremner/Giles, although against Rijkaard/Neeskens with the Kaiser overloading it's a tough gig.

Cracking team from Beam.

 

[Jim Beam]

Cheers @Gio

On its own I'd say that the Costacurta-Kaiser pair isn't well-suited to deal with Indnyc' attacking force, but that midfield base helps a lot. Still, there's no way that Müller & Ronaldo don't score at least once.

Yeah, you would give them a fair chance to score here just based on their individual ability. I actually thought about going with Rijkaard/Beckenbauer combo for a short while in what would be a major upgrade from Rijkaard/Koeman combo in Euro 88' but opted against it because:

- I didn't want to make another defensive upgrade as the team (awesome as that combo would be) stays pretty much the same in other areas which is less appealing overall imo;
- Costacurta has a solid record against pretty much peak Ronaldo. Yes, he has Müller here as well, but Costacurta was in his 30's and without Baresi on the other hand. 1 goal from open play in 5 games in Serie A and Coppa Italia (tbf Ronaldo was affected by injury problems in 1998/99 playing 45 minutes in each of their last two games then).

- Rijkaard/Neeskens midfield is just brilliant to pass by and I didn't want to hand him midfield initiative along with that star power upfront

Also, as genuinely great that front 3 is I prefer Ronaldo either with more technical striker (Romario e.g.) or supported by players with more creativity and goalscoring ability (Rivaldo/Ronaldinho e.g.). It is still great as it is though, only that I personally would opt for something different having Gullit and Müller already there. Overall, do think that Indy's decision to go 3-5-2 was a good one, but only lacks a proper CB's to make it fully convincing. My remarks in terms of attacking synergy upfront wouldn't make much difference in that case most likely. As it is, I just can't see Hansen, Dunnne working that well.

Shit teams in general considering what they will face in the finals. Liverpool this season in the league all over again.

Insightful.

 

[harms]

Müller - Ronaldo
Gullit ------------------------- Simonsen
Davids ------- Giles
Lizarazu--Passarella--Hansen--Cafu
Shilton
​

I would've probably went with something like this.

 

[Jim Beam]

Müller - Ronaldo
Gullit ------------------------- Simonsen
Davids ------- Giles
Lizarazu--Passarella--Hansen--Cafu
Shilton
​

I would've probably went with something like this.

Still think, especially with Rijkaard-Neeskens in there, that it would cut off much of Indy's midfield creativity and then you would have Ronaldo dropping deeper many times and running at the set-up defense. Which is a more desirable scenario when facing him imo.

Think that the system is fine. Against 4-4-2 in general, 3-5-2 is quite useful and has its advantages. I just don't believe in Hansen, Dunne roles here as wide CB's.

 

[Indnyc]

Müller - Ronaldo
Gullit ------------------------- Simonsen
Davids ------- Giles
Lizarazu--Passarella--Hansen--Cafu
Shilton
​

I would've probably went with something like this.

Didn’t get good feedback with the Hansen/Passarella combination

I wanted to get another defender during the reinforcement round but messed it up

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Insightful

Touche

On the game, I don't see this being a easy win for either side. Jim probably wins it 6 times and Indnyc 4 times out of 10 purely on the back of that front 3.

 

[harms]

Think that the system is fine. Against 4-4-2 in general, 3-5-2 is quite useful and has its advantages. I just don't believe in Hansen, Dunne roles here as wide CB's.

My suggestion was based on my lack of trust towards his wide center backs, not towards 3-5-2 in general tbf.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Think that the system is fine. Against 4-4-2 in general, 3-5-2 is quite useful and has its advantages

Not sure about that. The 3-5-2 was quite prominent in 80's when there was a general lack of great wingers.

I don't mind a 4-2-3-1 against a well built 3-5-2, but a well built 4-4-2 will simply stretch the back 3 too much leaving spaces all around and will be forced to act as a 5-3-2 instead where the wing backs will need to defend a lot more than what a 3-5-2 would allow.

I don't think I have ever voted for a 3-5-2 against a 4-4-2.

 

[Physiocrat]

Not sure about that. The 3-5-2 was quite prominent in 80's when there was a general lack of great wingers.

I don't mind a 4-2-3-1 against a well built 3-5-2, but a well built 4-4-2 will simply stretch the back 3 too much leaving spaces all around and will be forced to act as a 5-3-2 instead where the wing backs will need to defend a lot more than what a 3-5-2 would allow.

I don't think I have ever voted for a 3-5-2 against a 4-4-2.

That's interesting as IIRC 352 was created as a response to the 442. I suppose it is still consistent with your position but would mean having to play deep in the counter

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

That's interesting as IIRC 352 was created as a response to the 442. I suppose it is still consistent with your position but would mean having to play deep in the counter

What you say doesn't work with proper wingers. It only works with hybrid wingers who would pop into the midfield all the time and be support players and not be trying/capable to harass the fullback at all times

The birth of 3-5-2
Carlos Bilardo (best known for managing the Argentinian team that won the 1986 World Cup) , having been part of Osvaldo Zubeldía's brutal and pragmatic Estudiantes side, was as system-driven as any coach; putting him in charge of an Argentina side featuring one of the greatest individual talents there has ever been seemed like football's great joke. His solution was to make Maradona his captain and to develop a new formation to accommodate him.

Wingers were in decline, becoming auxiliary midfielders, he reasoned, so what was the point of full-backs? They had been becoming increasingly attacking since the early 50s and the days of the great Brazilian Nilton Santos, so why not simply redesignate them as midfielders?

 

[Jim Beam]

Not sure about that. The 3-5-2 was quite prominent in 80's when there was a general lack of great wingers.

I don't mind a 4-2-3-1 against a well built 3-5-2, but a well built 4-4-2 will simply stretch the back 3 too much leaving spaces all around and will be forced to act as a 5-3-2 instead where the wing backs will need to defend a lot more than what a 3-5-2 would allow.

I don't think I have ever voted for a 3-5-2 against a 4-4-2.

3-5-2 matches well against 2 attackers though as one defender will cover for them or watch for the incoming midfielder/danger. It also allows one of the defenders to go forward (in this scenario Passarella, no less), who has to be comfortable on the ball making it a numerical advantage in the midfield while being protected at the back. When wing-backs bomb forward, you keep the shape at the back or if one of them goes further (which will mostly be the case) one side is fully covered while the other will be protected by your wide CB's. You can also drop one of your DM at the same time which again allows you to keep the same shape in the defensive phase. I mean, it is always about having the right personnel in terms of great ball-playing CB, man-marking CB's who are also comfortable in wide areas and proper wing-backs (for example am not that big fan of Lizarazu as a wing-back). Although, of course, then you have arguments against any formation really.

But, in general, I would prefer playing 1 striker (false 9 ideally) against 3-5-2 which will disorient the defense and drag them out from their positions or in general 4-2-3-1 against a well built 3-5-2 just to match the numbers in midfield while still hitting them with great wingers. Also, pretty much all great wingers of old would find themselves adjusted in a 4-2-3-1 of today imo.

Agree with @Physiocrat that you would, in most cases, have to defend deeper and soak up the pressure in 4-4-2 against a well-built 3-5-2 hitting them on the counter directly and mostly through your wings.

In any case, a formation that is better suited to the individual quality of your players will always have an advantage over the other no matter which one will you opt to play.

Don't know, am not Sacchi or Lippi though, so maybe am just talking shit...

My suggestion was based on my lack of trust towards his wide center backs, not towards 3-5-2 in general tbf.

Tbf, I thought he would go that way.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Agree with @Physiocrat that you would, in most cases, have to defend deeper and soak up the pressure in 4-4-2 against a well-built 3-5-2 hitting them on the counter directly and mostly through your wings.

Well, that's the thing. In an already defensive formation, if you have to defend even deeper than usual, the chances of a successful counter become lesser and the ball is likely coming back into your box.

The wingbacks' old paradox of being capable of defending in a back 5 and then launching attacks through wings is reliable when their defensive contribution is not high.

Don't know, am not Sacchi or Lippi though, so maybe am just talking shit...

Again, touche

 

[Jim Beam]

Well, that's the thing. In an already defensive formation, if you have to defend even deeper than usual, the chances of a successful counter become lesser and the ball is likely coming back into your box.

4-4-2 is not a defensive formation and I don't mean making a bunker at the back, just not playing a high defensive line and stay compact.

The wingbacks' old paradox of being capable of defending in a back 5 and then launching attacks through wings is reliable when their defensive contribution is not high.

You would want them out though as that space behind them will always be the weakest spot in the formation.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

4-4-2 is not a defensive formation and I don't mean making a bunker at the back, just not playing a high defensive line and stay compact.

My bad, I misunderstood. I thought you meant 3-5-2 would have to defend deeper than usual (which is what I believe)

 

[Synco]

I wanted to get another defender during the reinforcement round but messed it up

Was there a good option with Ronaldo you missed?

Edit: Ah, saw what happened in the draft thread.

 

[Synco]

Tough to call, both defenses can get in serious trouble against the opposition offenses. Beam's CM is clearly superior, but Gullit will have a say as the third man on Indy's side. (Can see Beckenbauer being rather cautious with Müller/Ronaldo around, moving forward punctually rather than too often.)

Hansen/Dunne as wide CBs does it for me, late vote for Beam.

 

[Indnyc]

Good luck in the final @Jim Beam

 

[Gio]

Not sure about that. The 3-5-2 was quite prominent in 80's when there was a general lack of great wingers.

I don't mind a 4-2-3-1 against a well built 3-5-2, but a well built 4-4-2 will simply stretch the back 3 too much leaving spaces all around and will be forced to act as a 5-3-2 instead where the wing backs will need to defend a lot more than what a 3-5-2 would allow.

I don't think I have ever voted for a 3-5-2 against a 4-4-2.

That's a little bit simplistic though. What about the extra man in midfield that a 3-5-2 provides?

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

That's a little bit simplistic though. What about the extra man in midfield that a 3-5-2 provides?

Yea, that is an obvious advantage. That is why I said well built 4-4-2 like the Rijkaard/Neeskens midfield here which could hold its own with support from Puskas/Kaiser

Building a 4-4-2 is not the easiest that is why in all time drafts. We have been having plenty of them recently though. Two semifinalists with great 442's

 

[Gio]

Yea, that is an obvious advantage. That is why I said well built 4-4-2 like the Rijkaard/Neeskens midfield here which could hold its own with support from Puskas/Kaiser

Building a 4-4-2 is not the easiest that is why in all time drafts. We have been having plenty of them recently though. Two semifinalists with great 442's

Aye, it's a really tasty set-up with that extra GOAT calibre support provided by Beckenbauer and Puskas, in the two areas where a 4-4-2 can be weak or does not always maximise the opportunities (the holes either side of the midfield).

 

[Jim Beam]

Good luck in the final @Jim Beam

Thanks mate. I will need it (and then some).