P&G Draft - SF: Harms vs Tuppet

With players at Career peak, who will win this match?


  • Total voters
    27
  • Poll closed .

Tuppet

New Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
3,622
Location
West Coast
Not you, you always cover your bases like the experienced drafter you are :D. Its a thing right, where we say "Not saying like x will completely stop y but " and then proceed to argue as if x has completely stopped y.
everybody else is saying and voting on this assumption.
 

Tuppet

New Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
3,622
Location
West Coast
DI Stefano does seem very very underrated here, who is actually stopping him ? Is it Lerby that would be assigned the task, what about Hassler ? who will be looking after him ? Actually I have no idea what is your defensive strategy here @harms
 

Tuppet

New Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
3,622
Location
West Coast
Thomas Hassler is also no slouch by any comparison in this game. He is a 2 time German player of the year when he was competing against the likes of Matthaus & Sammer. He came third in World player of year in 1992 and was considered de facto the best player of the tournament in Euro 92. He provided most assists in 1994 world cup and was an allround menace with his technique, creativity and work rate. You would need a defensive player in your midfield just to contain him.

here's some of that awesome gif work from Sjor, just look at the stuff, Lerby could just be following Hassler and would still have his hands full, but he also has to contend with Di Stefano -

With little or no debate at the moment we decided to give you a peak into what Häßler brings to the team, and why he's a good fit for the role as a priority target through the drafting process (from his offensive output, to movement in the final third, and dynamism):

 
Last edited:

Tuppet

New Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
3,622
Location
West Coast
Also now that Beckham is replaced by Figo, its not a 4-2-4 formation turning into 4-3-3. Its a 4-2-4 period.
 

Don Alfredo

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2018
Messages
2,071
Supports
Germany
I see many players in Tuppet's side where harms has no answer how to stop them. Di Stefano is too much for Lerby. Czibor is gonna beat his man time and time again and drill in those dangerous low crosses like he did for Puskas and like Gento did for Di Stefano. Also who is going to stop Beckenbauer? He can take teams apart alone with his runs and passing, yet there is no player assigned to contain him.

Feels like everything would look different when Tuppet had Maradona instead of Di Stefano here, despite the latter being the much better fit here. Simply because he has the work rate to defend against Suarez (or harms' midfield in general) while being just a bit worse attacking wise.

Harms' biggest advantage is actually on his left side, Rensenbrink AND Evra vs Benarrivo sounds deadly. Unless Bene is known as a hard working winger who tracks back constantly? Can't say anything about that. Otherwise I would bet on Rensenbrink to score for sure, maybe even twice.

I like the Suarez pick because he is a clear upgrade on Effenberg, who has never been a great defensive player either. I don't understand the Figo-Beckham change, you get more dribbling and pace (which your attack has in abundance) and lose work rate and defensive positioning which you badly needed and which the voters appreciated very much in your last games.
 

Tuppet

New Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
3,622
Location
West Coast
Bene vs Evra is also not an easy matchup for Pat. I did a complete profile of Bene here, below are some of his goals and skills -

Bene's brilliant goal against Brazil 66

Bene goal in Olympic finals

Bene's delightful cross from right wing for Farkas goal

The slick Bene - Albert combination that won the penalty, I can totally something similar happening with Hassler - Bene.


Bene composed finish against Yashin
 

oneniltothearsenal

Caf's Milton Friedman and Arse Aficionado
Scout
Joined
Dec 17, 2013
Messages
11,252
Supports
Brazil, Arsenal,LA Aztecs
Alberto Di Stefano? I almost want to vote against @Tuppet just for that :nono:
 

Enigma_87

You know who
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
27,730
I see many players in Tuppet's side where harms has no answer how to stop them. Di Stefano is too much for Lerby. Czibor is gonna beat his man time and time again and drill in those dangerous low crosses like he did for Puskas and like Gento did for Di Stefano. Also who is going to stop Beckenbauer? He can take teams apart alone with his runs and passing, yet there is no player assigned to contain him.

Feels like everything would look different when Tuppet had Maradona instead of Di Stefano here, despite the latter being the much better fit here. Simply because he has the work rate to defend against Suarez (or harms' midfield in general) while being just a bit worse attacking wise.

Harms' biggest advantage is actually on his left side, Rensenbrink AND Evra vs Benarrivo sounds deadly. Unless Bene is known as a hard working winger who tracks back constantly? Can't say anything about that. Otherwise I would bet on Rensenbrink to score for sure, maybe even twice.

I like the Suarez pick because he is a clear upgrade on Effenberg, who has never been a great defensive player either. I don't understand the Figo-Beckham change, you get more dribbling and pace (which your attack has in abundance) and lose work rate and defensive positioning which you badly needed and which the voters appreciated very much in your last games.
Figo is better than Becks in every sense apart from FK and long passes from deep. Figo is the better leader, better scorer, better dribbler, etc.
 

Enigma_87

You know who
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
27,730
Aye, if anyone has been underrated in this game, it is Alfredo Di Stefano, of all players. Can't imagine him facing much resistance here whatsoever.
Di Stefano is probably the worst rated GOAT here(along with Cruyff). Often seen as a square peg in round hole in terms of fit and probably very few times seen as the star of the show in the same respect Maradona, Messi, Pele are..
 

MJJ

New Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2009
Messages
28,954
Location
sunderland(1)-Derby(1)
Figo is better than Becks in every sense apart from FK and long passes from deep. Figo is the better leader, better scorer, better dribbler, etc.
Not defensively which is what moby's team needed. His team was fine offensively, I would have upgraded the defense/midfield while keeping the attack the same.

Now they are better offensively but far worse defensively, his statement of transitioning to a 4-3-3 does not hold either.
 

Enigma_87

You know who
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
27,730
I reckon Desailly is a Top tier CB (I'f put him in tier 1.5 per other thread).
Other point is having Beckenbauer and Benarrivo on same side. Both are attack minded players and without the calming impact of Schwarzenbeck in-between, I don't see it as perfect..
You might have a point in terms of putting Beckenbauer to the left as Bossis was a more conservative as a full back, but Benarrivo has always been excellent in both phases of the game and when he was needed to defend he could've play very conservative role either side without much hassle.

One of the best Italian fullbacks who could contribute in both phases.
 

Enigma_87

You know who
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
27,730
Not defensively which is what moby's team needed. His team was fine offensively, I would have upgraded the defense/midfield while keeping the attack the same.

Now they are better offensively but far worse defensively, his statement of transitioning to a 4-3-3 does not hold either.
Figo had a pretty good work rate. You do have a point but the gap between Figo's offensive contribution IMO would have a bigger impact in an isolated game than Becks defensive one.

In terms of the game in hand indeed in this set up harms team stylistically looks more as a 4-2-4 than 4-3-3 if Figo is playing in his favorite role.
 

MJJ

New Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2009
Messages
28,954
Location
sunderland(1)-Derby(1)
Figo had a pretty good work rate. You do have a point but the gap between Figo's offensive contribution IMO would have a bigger impact in an isolated game than Becks defensive one.

In terms of the game in hand indeed in this set up harms team stylistically looks more as a 4-2-4 than 4-3-3 if Figo is playing in his favorite role.
I just feel that with pele+law+resenbrink you dont really need to add to the defense. He also has moore's playmaking from the back.
 

2mufc0

Everything is fair game in capitalism!
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Messages
17,098
Supports
Dragon of Dojima
Alberto will have a good game here.
 

harms

Shining Star of Paektu Mountain
Staff
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
28,085
Location
Moscow
I see many players in Tuppet's side where harms has no answer how to stop them. Di Stefano is too much for Lerby. Czibor is gonna beat his man time and time again and drill in those dangerous low crosses like he did for Puskas and like Gento did for Di Stefano.
You know that I have Bobby Moore, right? Vidić is covering Kocsis, Evra — Bene etc. Moore is a "free" defender who's going to pick Di Stefano when he comes close to the box — in addition to Lerby/Suarez who are going to help covering.

I mean Bossis-McNeill-Beckenbauer-Benarrivo + Desailly against Rensenbrink-Pelé-Law-Figo (let aside Suarez) is, supposedly, an answer?
 

harms

Shining Star of Paektu Mountain
Staff
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
28,085
Location
Moscow
Not you, you always cover your bases like the experienced drafter you are :D. Its a thing right, where we say "Not saying like x will completely stop y but " and then proceed to argue as if x has completely stopped y.
everybody else is saying and voting on this assumption.
Well, I said that Vidić is a stylistic match and one of the best possible fits for Kocsis, which I genuinely believe and I don't think that it's questionable. He won't stop him completely, but his strengths somewhat compensate those of Kocsis
 

Don Alfredo

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2018
Messages
2,071
Supports
Germany
You know that I have Bobby Moore, right? Vidić is covering Kocsis, Evra — Bene etc. Moore is a "free" defender who's going to pick Di Stefano when he comes close to the box — in addition to Lerby/Suarez who are going to help covering.

I mean Bossis-McNeill-Beckenbauer-Benarrivo + Desailly against Rensenbrink-Pelé-Law-Figo (let aside Suarez) is, supposedly, an answer?
I rate Koscis very highly and I don't think Vidic can contain him. Koscis is literally the greatest header of the ball ever, plus countless goals on the ground as well. You would need Vidic to be like the best ever heading CB and a very good one on the ground to contain him completely. Moore has to help out there, he has to help out vs Czibor and he has to help out vs Di Stefano. I mean he is a good fit for that type of role and one of the best CB ever, but he has several open flanks to defend here. Not that your defense will be cut open anytime because you have great last-ditch-defenders and Moore is one of the best around to organize his troops.

Bossis is an okay fit against Figo. Not great but okay. Desailly vs Pele is not great either because there is not one defensive player fit to stop Pele, but could you think of a better one to try it than Marcel Desailly? Fast, strong, great header, equally comfortable in midfield and at central defense (those two areas where Pele is at his best).

McNeill and Beckenbauer vs Law I can buy. Benarrivo is not good enough to contain Rensenbrink and Evra, I said that before. That will end badly for him.

In conclusion, I expect you getting good service from the flanks and worse service through the middle. This has much to do with Tuppet having the upper hand in midfield, mostly thanks to the influence of Di Stefano (and Desailly).

The deciding point for me is that the gulf between Desailly and Pele is much much smaller than the gulf between Lerby and Di Stefano.

In hindsight, I probably made my comments sound too harshly because I made it seem like only you had those defensive problems. I believe both sides will have big defensive problems, only that yours will be bigger:wenger:
 

Joga Bonito

The Art of Football
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
8,252
@Joga Bonito

One of the reasons I keep mentioning in the GOAT context is because of this.

Okay, lets say I am underrating Lerby and Suarez both for some reason (I don't think I am but I'll play along as there will always be slightly different views. Its not like I am calling him Pirlo and you are calling him Desailly).

Do you think the pair is good enough to handle Di Stefano and a on-rushing Hassler? Not that I rate Hassler very highly considering who else is around, but he will take away some attention and give all the more freedom for Di Stefano to run the show.

For me, a peak Di Stefano (not the 38 year old one in 1964 when he faced Suarez) would rip Suarez apart.

You always have to remember the context in such games. He might have work rate and defensive capability (not very high as per me and good enough for you which is fair), but do you think that is enough against the giant he is facing? Fair enough if you do.

I am making it tough for myself to pick these players in the future drafts I feel at times :lol:

Geez, see that’s the thing which annoys me and people calling (not just you but several others in the thread) Suarez’s defensive ability in question. Put a Xavi or a Falcao there and people probably won’t do that (or not to this extent) but Suarez who has excelled in one of the greatest defensive sides of all time (and not in a Pirlo surrounded by Vidal, Marchisio and Pogba manner) tends to have his defensive credentials questioned more often than not. Fair enough if people think playing in La Grande Inter played a role (once again he played an active defensive role) but seeing his defensive ability for the more expansive Spain in the 1964 Euros or the 1966 WC should make all the difference. Suarez was already an industrious player pre Inter, for both Barca and Spain but it was his move to Inter and tutelage under Herrera that saw him transform his defensive game and further imbue his skill set with defensive nous, positioning and astute ball winning capabilities. As harms pointed out, Suarez wasn’t necessarily a physical hard-tackling midfielder, but a wily and a crafty operator whose reading of the game and positioning meant he made loads of interceptions and his deceptive ability to nick the ball of players resulting in plenty of balls won too.

The thing being for a midfielder of his ilk, he was one of the best defensively in the business, alongside the like of Xavi, Liedholm, Falcao, Overath or Modric (who’d be a good comparison in terms of play style and dynamism). Now will he or any of those midfielders come up trumps against di Stefano, definitely not, and they shouldn’t either as the ‘heavy lifting’ should be done by an accompanying midfielder (Lerby in this case) but will there be any ripping apart? No, I don’t think so.
 
Last edited:

Tuppet

New Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
3,622
Location
West Coast
Geez, see that’s the thing which annoys me and people calling (not just you but several others in the thread) Suarez’s defensive ability in question. Put a Xavi or a Falcao there and people probably won’t do that (or not to this extent) but Suarez who has excelled in one of the greatest defensive sides of all time (and not in a Pirlo surrounded by Vidal, Marchisio and Pogba manner) tends to have his defensive credentials questioned more often than not. Fair enough if people think playing in La Grande Inter played a role (once again he played an active defensive role) but seeing his defensive ability for the more expansive Spain in the 1964 Euros or the 1966 WC should make all the difference. Suarez was already an industrious player pre Inter, for both Barca and Spain but it was his move to Inter and tutelage under Herrera that saw him transform his defensive game and further imbue his skill set with defensive nous, positioning and astute ball winning capabilities. As harms pointed out, Suarez wasn’t necessarily a physical hard-tackling midfielder, but a wily and a crafty operator whose reading of the game and positioning meant he made loads of interceptions and his deceptive ability to nick the ball of players resulting in plenty of balls won too.

The thing being for a midfielder of his ilk, he was one of the best defensively in the business, alongside the like of Xavi, Liedholm, Falcao, Overath or Modric (who’d be a good comparison in terms of play style and dynamism). Now will he or any of those midfielders come up trumps against di Stefano, definitely not, and they shouldn’t either as the ‘heavy lifting’ should be done by an accompanying midfielder (Lerby in this case) but will there be any ripping apart? No, I don’t think so.
I sort of see that Suarez's defensive game being underrated, but at the same time Di Stefano's attacking game seem really underrated here as well. Don Alfredo made a good point that if it was Maradona in place of Di Stefano, everybody would see harms midfield being sort of inadequate to contain him. I remember in one game I had a midfield of Di Stefano - Matthaus - Neeskens against Maradona and it was consensus that he'll rip us apart as we don't have a bona-fide defensive midfielder. And each of those midfielder is better defensively than Harms midfield.

Wording (rip apart) aside I can totally see Di Stefano getting a lot of freedom in this game. He is as good an attacker as there has ever been. I don't know why I am telling you this as you know more about probably all of my midfield better than me. But anyway I can see anyone going for Harms team, but its almost a fact here that Di Stefano has most freedom of all the players in the game, there is no one containing him and Beckenbauer.

As for Suarez I would say while he did great in a defensive set up, he was supported by an incredibly, notoriously defensive team. It wasn't just Bedin, but the likes of Jair, Picchi & Burgnich and a hard working Mazolla supporting him. Here in a much more gung ho setup he is exposed and facing an all time great.
 

Tuppet

New Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
3,622
Location
West Coast
Alberto Di Stefano's famous performance. The most important thing to notice here would be to see how he was running the midfield almost like a deep lying playmaker and still score a hattrick in a Champions league final. Thats what makes him unique, I have him sort of deeper in the pitch (Still ahead of 2 midfielder) but he played even deeper when needed and still took apart opposition defenses. Playing against a 4-2-4 setup with no defensive midfielder assigned on him, he should be the difference maker in the game.

 

Tuppet

New Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
3,622
Location
West Coast
In Sandor Kocsis also we are talking about a player whose 1.103 goals/game average is ranked No.1 for players past 43 caps in FIFA class-A competition, closely followed by Gerd Muller with 1.097 goals/game (68 scores in 62 games), and are the only two players in history above a +1.0 goals/game average encompassing more than 43 internationals. Ferenc Puskás with .99 goals/game (84 goals in 85 matches) is currently ranked 3rd.

We are talking about a player who has 7 hattricks for his National team and the first player to score 2 hattricks in world cup. A striker whose 11 goals are the second best ever haul in a world cup and his record 2.2 goal/game average in a single World Cup finals competition is still unbeaten.

He is being served by an all time great left winger and a player who played with him for almost a decade and had a telepathic understanding with. Czibor-Kocsis is an all time great partnership and Vidic being good in air doesn't magically negate their threat.

My contention is that we control the midfield as its better in both quantity and quality. Czibor doesn't have the all time great full back stopping him. Which would mean we'll create more chances and the quality of Czibor's crosses (both low and high as he did for Puskas & Kocsis) would mean that eventually the finisher of the caliber of Kocsis & Di Stefano are bound to score some.
 

harms

Shining Star of Paektu Mountain
Staff
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
28,085
Location
Moscow
I rate Koscis very highly and I don't think Vidic can contain him. Koscis is literally the greatest header of the ball ever, plus countless goals on the ground as well. You would need Vidic to be like the best ever heading CB and a very good one on the ground to contain him completely. Moore has to help out there, he has to help out vs Czibor and he has to help out vs Di Stefano. I mean he is a good fit for that type of role and one of the best CB ever, but he has several open flanks to defend here. Not that your defense will be cut open anytime because you have great last-ditch-defenders and Moore is one of the best around to organize his troops.

Bossis is an okay fit against Figo. Not great but okay. Desailly vs Pele is not great either because there is not one defensive player fit to stop Pele, but could you think of a better one to try it than Marcel Desailly? Fast, strong, great header, equally comfortable in midfield and at central defense (those two areas where Pele is at his best).

McNeill and Beckenbauer vs Law I can buy
You don't see the contradictions in logic? My players can't defend one on one but with Tuppet it's somehow one on one battles?
 

Don Alfredo

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2018
Messages
2,071
Supports
Germany
You don't see the contradictions in logic? My players can't defend one on one but with Tuppet it's somehow one on one battles?
Well no I don't think one-on-one is a great idea for Tuppet either:nervous:. I said multiple times that Benarrivo vs Rensenbrink (and Evra) is very bad for him. I also said Desailly vs Pele is not great, but I think it is better in comparison to Di Stefano vs Lerby.

I don't expect Beckenbauer to fight fire against many different players because Law is very good and McNeill needs him to help. The same way I don't see Moore having a big effect on the 1v1 on the sides. Maybe I worded it badly, I actually expect Vidic and Moore together to handle Koscis. What I said above at the beginning was more the preface for why Moore can't be everywhere, rather than me saying Koscis will 100% destroy you.

That means I think both CFs will be handled okay-ish, one fullback on each team will have nightmares later and the difference comes from other areas. I explained already why I think Di Stefano will impact the game more than Pele and that is the difference in my opinion.

I will say again, I expect both defenses to struggle heavily because they don't have the numbers and the quality (for the most part) to handle the attackers of the other team. That is what happens when everyone spends big on attackers and low on defensive midfielders or fullbacks. Not a slight on you, it's what practically everyone did during squad building:lol:
 
Last edited:

Joga Bonito

The Art of Football
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
8,252
but at the same time Di Stefano's attacking game seem really underrated here as well.
That is definitely true and I do think he’s underrated overall as too is Cruyff for some reason, can’t recall the last time either one of them won a draft, although I haven’t following the drafts that much lately. I can see di Stefano having a good game here and as much as I like Suarez and Lerby, di Stefano will have some joy against them. However, do think Hassler in that CM position does limit him a wee bit, esp with Desailly being tasked with minding Pele. Ideally di Stefano’s perfect for that role but a more conventional CM there would have made a lot of difference as opposed to Hassler imo, who does require di Stefano to be a tad bit more conservative, as hard working as the German was.


Wording (rip apart) aside I can totally see Di Stefano getting a lot of freedom in this game. He is as good an attacker as there has ever been. I don't know why I am telling you this as you know more about probably all of my midfield better than me. But anyway I can see anyone going for Harms team, but its almost a fact here that Di Stefano has most freedom of all the players in the game, there is no one containing him and Beckenbauer.
It was just me getting rather irked and responding to the rather repetitive and usual criticism of Suarez being too ‘lightweight’ and being shoehorned as the classical deep lying playmaker whilst Lerby was once again portrayed as the gung ho nutter :lol:, so don’t mind me. Esp since Suarez was seen as a downgrade defensively to Effenberg, who’s the more physical and hard hitting midfielder defensively but apart from that I’d rate Suarez higher than him defensively. If anything Effenberg’s lack of dynamism or turning pace was more likely to exposed against your di Stefanos and Maradonas than Suarez. If it was “di Stefano’s too much for that midfield duo to handle” or something along those lines, without the exagerrated criticism of both of them here, I wouldn’t have batted an eye.


Either way I do think this is a close match and could have gone for either side but Hassler being in the CM role just made me tilt for harms. Although Czibor did give me a moment’s pause. Criminal how he’s not even been mentioned at all in the first page and probably only by don alfredo throughout the match, or how he’s more viewed as a crosser to Kocsis’s heading. He’ll have a great game here by my reckoning.
 
Last edited:

Charly

New Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2017
Messages
178
Very close game this. Both teams have great players and there should be goals in this one. I like the change tuppet has made to start Hassler, but he really needed to upgrade mcneill. On the other hand Harms would really need another defensive midfielder here, as it is Di Stefano & Hassler would cause big problems in midfield.
 

Tuppet

New Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
3,622
Location
West Coast
Bump with a vintage Beckenbauer performance against one of the finest National teams & one of the game's best striker Cruyff in World cup 1974 final. Shows clearly how Der Kaiser was able to run a game from his libero position while also giving a masterclass in defending.

 

Tuppet

New Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
3,622
Location
West Coast
Blonde Arrow - More than a forward


When FIFA came to name the 20th century’s best player, they couldn’t decide between Pele and Maradona. Few could. Not even Maradona, who remarked: “I really don’t know if I was better than Pele.” What Maradona did know, though, was that “Di Stefano was better than Pele”. “The mere mention of Don Alfredo,” he insisted, “fills me with pride.”

The legendary Inter Milan and Barcelona coach Helenio Herrera agreed. “If Pele was the lead violinist,” he once said, “Di Stefano was the entire orchestra.”

And yet Di Stefano – denied the opportunity to exhibit his talent at the World Cup despite playing for three different countries, and having performed his magic in an age before mass television ownership, not to mention a country only just emerging from political and social isolation – has rarely been afforded the status handed to those two universally accepted greats.

His finest and most renowned moment came in the 1960 European Cup Final, when Real Madrid defeated Eintracht Frankfurt 7-3 at Hampden Park – a match the BBC in Scotland continued to show every Christmas for years; the only one that continues to sell, still in black and white, on DVD. A game in which, according to one report, Madrid “played like angels” in front of the highest-ever attendance for a European Cup final: just the 127,000.

It was a performance that the Guardian journalist Richard Williams described as “Fonteyn and Nureyv, Bob Dylan at the Albert Hall, the first night of the Rite of Spring, Olivier at his peak, the Armoury Show and the Sydney Opera House all rolled into one”.

Sir Alex Ferguson, watching from the stands, still remembers it as the finest game he ever saw; one in which, according to another paper the following morning, “Real flaunted all that has made them incomparable.” “To list Real Madrid’s team,” added this scribe, “is to chronicle greatness.” And the greatest of them all, the undisputed leader of the side, was Di Stefano – “a great amongst greats”, says Platini.

In England, Maradona and Pele are followed by Best or Charlton; in France, by Platini or Zidane; in Holland, by Cruyff; in Brazil, by Garrincha; in Germany by Beckenbauer; across the world, by a combination of them all. In Spain, where he played, it’s not that Di Stefano follows Pele and Maradona, it’s that he matches them. Exceeds them, even. Joaquin Peiro, the Spanish midfielder who played in the great Inter Milan team that won the European Cup in the mid-’60s, speaks for many in Spain when he says, “For me, the No.1 is Di Stefano.”

Those that saw him often, knew. Those that didn’t, missed out. Sadly there are many of them. In 1950 and 1954, his native Argentina did not go to the World Cup, in 1958 his adopted Spain did not qualify and in 1962 a muscle injury prevented him from travelling. His absence is one of the tragedies of the game. “If Di Stefano had played at the World Cup”, says Just Fontaine, “he would be recognised as the white Pele.”

“he was my favourite player,” recalls Cruyff, “and what I most loved about Di Stefano was everything he did he did for the team.” Less fitting was that he should have to hand it over rather than keeping it himself. If anyone made Madrid the world’s most successful club, it is he.

Without Di Stefano, much of modern football does not make sense. Destroying the tactical orthodoxy of the WM formation with his constant movement and awareness, he propelled the game into the modern era. “Di Stefano turned still photographs into the cinema,” says Arrigo Sacchi. When he did an advert for tights, a photograph of him with his wife’s legs splashed across newspapers, it was a first for a footballer. And how many players could claim to have been kidnapped, as Di Stefano was in 1963 in Venezuela? Even if he did later insist with a smile, “they seemed decent enough kids.”

It started in Argentina where he won two South American Player of the Year Awards. But his greatest triumphs came in Europe, where he turned that history on its head, making Real Madrid the biggest club in the world, laying the foundations for the Behemoth that now stands astride the Paseo de la Castellana.

He won eight league titles in 11 seasons; after just two in the years before Di Stefano, Madrid have won 30 since his arrival – more than half of those on offer. More importantly, Madrid won the first five European Cups, setting up a dynasty that remains unchallenged and defines the club: no football team has ever been as synonymous with a trophy as Madrid with the European Cup.

Madrid had other players, of course: Paco Gento and Ferenc Puskas were amongst the finest of their generation. But Di Stefano was the best; it was he who started it off, who led them. “For children of the 1950s, Di Stefano was above all a victorious sound on the radio, his name echoed round like a heartbeat associated with some success or other, transporting us to the Parques des Princes, San Siro or Hampden Park,” recalled the editor of sports daily AS, Alfredo Relaño.

Di Stefano was top scorer in the league five times, finishing his career with 216 in 282 games for Madrid. He scored in every one of those five European Cup finals, becoming the competition’s highest ever goalscorer with 49. In total he scored 418 goals for Madrid. And he wasn’t even a striker. Not really, even if he did wear the No.9. Goals alone do not account for two Ballón d’Ors and five Spanish Player of the Year awards. “He had it all,” said Fontaine. “He was quick, technically gifted, good in the air, a goalscorer, an organiser and a respected leader.” “He brought to Europe a tango made of perfect technique and terrifying acceleration,” added Platini. “He totally controlled the game. You looked at him and asked yourself: ‘how can I possibly stop him?’” recalled Bobby Charlton.

The answer, much of the time, was that you couldn’t – and Di Stefano knew it. Ten minutes into one game, he turned to Fidel Ugarte, a young defender, and said: “Are you going to follow me everywhere, sonny?” Nervously, Ugarte replied: “Yes, my coach told me I have to.” “OK,” shrugged Di Stefano, “you might even learn something.”

Calderon recalls listening to the radio and imagining “some kind of superman”. It’s easy to see why. Di Stefano was everywhere. L’Equipe dubbed him ‘L’Omnipresente’. “It’s no exaggeration to say that he played like three players put together,” said one biographer. “He was a midfielder who won the ball and started the play, a No.10 who controlled the game and delivered the final pass, and a striker who put the ball in the net. If you put together Redondo, Zidane and [Brazilian] Ronaldo, you might just get close to what he was.”

“The only thing he didn’t do,” says one former team-mate, “was play in goal.” “Actually,” Di Stefano grins, “I did once – for River when then had their first-choice keeper sent off.”

An excerpt of Di Stefano in the game against Freiburg to describe him best:
A defensive nine as well as an attacking third and four-phase playmaker

6 minutes: Alfredo Di Stéfano gets the ball in front of the center line, carries the ball into the middle, but his outside of the boot pass goes astray. Frankfurt has the ball in midfield, Di Stéfano goes to counter press, but is dodged. The Germans play a long-range pass to the wing and counter. It comes to a cross, but Real’s defense clears it over the foul line. Marquitos has the ball – and plays it to Di Stéfano, who offers himself to receive the pass in his own penalty area and passes it with one touch. Canario plays to Marquitos, then back to Di Stéfano. He carries the ball through the midfield now, confident as ever. With the ball at his feet, he thrusts forward and plays a square pass that preceded a longer ball circulation for Real.


Real Madrid 1956​

Di Stefano could play all of the central positions; center forward, second striker, ten, eight, six, central defender, libero. But he played them all simultaneously. As a center forward, he often fell back between the defender in the 3-2-5 to fetch balls directly from his own penalty area and then march forwards. With the ball at his feet, he used his game intelligence to open the game with long-range passes, dodge around spaces and enemy pressing movements with combinations, or simply dribble past one, two, or even three opponents.

These slalom runs as a defensive midfielder are often equated with his playing style; but that is a reduction of his skills and (even a negative) glorification of his archetype. Very often Di Stéfano is reduced to his goal threat from deep and merely supporting the midfield, but the Argentinian superstar of the 50s was much more than that. He could fill in as a deep playmaker in a variety of roles and styles, possessing the very rare ability to completely steal the game with his rhythm and dynamism and briefly take over a game.


It's not just Di Stefano’s talent that won him such success and admiration, but his temperament too: his determination and desire to win, even if it meant sacrificing himself. Especially if it meant sacrificing himself. The great Italian Gianni Rivera recalls one occasion when Milan put two players on him. So Di Stefano simply ran around the most pointless areas of the pitch, sprinting about the full-back areas, seemingly running blind, tiring them out and leaving space for his team-mates. “He drove us mad,” Rivera sighed.

“He was the brainiest player I ever saw,” said Charlton, “and he oozed effort and courage. He was an inspiring leader and the perfect example to others.”


“I always saw football as a game in which you have to run and sweat,” Di Stefano said. And he could be sharp with his tongue and fiercely irritable with those who didn’t give their all in pursuit of victory. His quick-fire response to another Madrid great Amancio is the stuff of legend – the embodiment of what Madrid like to think they’re all about: talent and commitment wrapped in one.

Before a match, Amancio noted that his Real Madrid shirt was plain white. “Hey, my shirt has no Real Madrid shield on it,” he announced. “You’ve got to sweat for it first, sunshine,” replied Di Stefano.

Di Stefano certainly sweated for his shirt. Not that Eusebio cared: Portugal’s finest ever player still claims that swapping jerseys with the Blond Arrow was “the greatest satisfaction of my life”. Football will forever be grateful to an electrician from River and a mother’s love.

Ramon Calderon likes to tell the anecdote of a father and son strolling through a park and coming across a statue of Di Stefano. “Daddy,” says the boy, “was he a player?” “No,” says his father, “he was a team.” Not just any team either: the greatest team in history.
 

Theon

Lord of the Iron Islands
Joined
Oct 14, 2011
Messages
13,292
Okay after reading around this some more and watching the videos I'm still not convinced on the balance of that midfield against Di Stefano - I think that's obvious though and most people have mentioned that. There does seem to be some underrating of Di Stefano's influence, but the platform seems to be there for him to have an influential game.

I do however agree with this along with the post made by @Don Alfredo :

I would say it has lost a bit of steel but there was always more than enough of that to start with, with someone like Lerby :lol:, but is actually better now defensively. With a steely ball winner like Lefby alongside him, I’d rate Suarez’s defensive nous and dynamism more in this set up.
I think people (myself included) may have overrated Effenberg's defensive impact based on his aggression, but as Joga quite rightly says you don't necessarily need that bite when you have Lerby there (though too much steely determination is never a bad thing - his influence in the 2001 Champions League run was legendary). From what I can tell I would agree that Suarez had better mobility (deliberately short of saying workrate there) and probably slightly superior defensive positioning. On the flipside Effenberg did offer more defensive bite, and he was also the stronger player and more intimidating physically.

What I would say though, is that for defensive mobility / positioning, Suarez may have offered more than Effenberg but he didn't press like Gattuso for example and don't think it should be oversold against someone like Di Stefano. I think the partnership may work better with more of a designated defensive player behind him than Lerby, who I agree with @Edgar Allan Pillow was more box to box.

At the same time, it's clearly a gung-ho side as even as a 4-4-2 it seems adventurous but that's not to say it wouldn't work. Team's have been offensive before and done well.
 

idmanager

New Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
2,843
Ideally di Stefano’s perfect for that role but a more conventional CM there would have made a lot of difference as opposed to Hassler imo, who does require di Stefano to be a tad bit more conservative
Di Stefano's game was all about being progressive and conservative at the same time. The presence of Di Stefano should actually make room for a more progressive CM so that the opposition midfield duo have more than one runner to handle giving Di Stefano way more freedom.

I maybe underrating Suarez and will watch a few more full games but I have watched enough of Di Stefano to know he is being not treated as a Goat especially keeping in mind the opposition duo which is not a great one. Already said before its functional.

The left sided role is actually very natural. They say the Bernabeu slightly tilted towards the left because that is the side on which Di Stefano impacted and played on most times.
 
Last edited:

harms

Shining Star of Paektu Mountain
Staff
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
28,085
Location
Moscow
Good game, @Tuppet. I really liked Desailly's use — hard to imagine a better player to face Pelé, although even that probably wouldn't be enough to contain him.
On the other hand, I was not a fan of Hassler's substitution tbf.
 

Gio

★★★★★★★★
Joined
Jan 25, 2001
Messages
20,381
Location
Bonnie Scotland
Supports
Rangers
Quite like the use of Hassler here. A seriously under-rated player and unfortunate that his searing peak years didn't fall in a year when Germany won a major tournament. Top class at Euro '92. Kroos' last-gasp free-kick against Sweden this summer was a replica in so many ways of Hassler's against the CIS, except that time Hassler and Germany ground their way out of the group and should ultimately have won the competition. Stood out in 1994 as well, albeit that German team creaked with age.
 
Last edited:

Tuppet

New Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
3,622
Location
West Coast
Good game, @Tuppet. I really liked Desailly's use — hard to imagine a better player to face Pelé, although even that probably wouldn't be enough to contain him.
On the other hand, I was not a fan of Hassler's substitution tbf.
Congratulations Harms ! It was always going to be hard against your team. I took some time to decide whether to play Mackay there or Hassler and from what I am reading it seem I chose wrong, although I would have lost with Mackay as well. But my reasoning for picking Hassler was simple. I wanted to attack your 2 man midfield and for that I wanted my midfield to be more proactive. Lerby & Suarez somebody might have bought against only Di Stefano but adding Hassler I wanted to have another outlet for supporting Di Stefano and have a player with similar technical skills as him so they can you know like play 1-2s etc. I would have played Mackay for example if I was against Theon or Onenil where I have to worry about a proper number 10.

Anyway best of luck in finals.
 

Joga Bonito

The Art of Football
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
8,252
@Tuppet

Perhaps Hassler instead of Bene(who wasn't getting much appreciation) and Mackay in the central midfield would have been a nice option. Mackay was certainty quite the nifty player on the ball for a B2B and his pass and move/one-two quick tempo playing style would have seen him right at home with Di Stefano.



 
Last edited:

Tuppet

New Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
3,622
Location
West Coast
@Tuppet

Perhaps Hassler instead of Bene(who wasn't getting much appreciation) and Mackay in thre central midfield would have been a nice option. Mackay was certainty quite the nifty player on the ball for a B2B and his pass and move/one-two quick tempo playing style would have seen him right at home with Di Stefano.



Yeah seem like this would have been better.