Decided. I think Bepo's attack will see more of the ball (they are slightly less direct) and has the creativity to unlock harms defense. If harms had someone like Matthews against Capdevila I might change my vote. Also I think a more mobile CF or a more creative second-striker would do better to take on Kohler and Ferdinand
Reality-Monopoly Draft - SF: harms vs Enigma/Sjor
- Thread starter Edgar Allan Pillow
- Start date
while its painful to see the result while you think you have the slight advantage its great to see that Beckham is finally getting some love! Perfect winger at his peak IMO
Well, that's depend on your definition of "great", if you compare him to Ronaldo, he is comfortably a few tiers beyond, but as you can see in all his extensive goal compilations he uses his dribbling quite often when he is running with the ball. He doesn't have Ronaldinho-esque (in style, I wouldn't dare compare their dribbling ability-wise) ability to beat defenders while standing still, for example, that's not a discussion.
Regarding his hold up - that's where I'm going to argue with you. He really was very smart and played his partners in very often and very effectively. Juventus, in it's article named "John Charles: Juve's greatest forward" (not too shabby that), specifically mentioned: "For anyone who saw Charles play in the late 1950's and early 1960's when he was at his peak, the Welshman was the stuff of legends. There is a famous photo of him scoring yet another header and the goalkeeper is clinging on to him while two defenders try in vain to stop him. Another picture shows the dreadnought striker leaping above Vieri (not that one) in a derby match and even at full stretch, the Torino keeper is nowhere near him.
John Charles was more than the proverbial battering ram. He was blessed with the ability to hang in the air and, as if suspended in motion, he would use his momentary advantage to decide whether to head for goal or lay the ball off for a colleague to apply the coup de grace. His unselfish play won him many admirers."
Yeah I think an out and out winger will be worse match for Capdevila. Still he held his own at the biggest stage and here has Netto's support to counter harms right flank.
Actually I rate Cesar pretty high and have picked him before. So does @Gio I think
In terms of fine margins any advantage here and there could provide to be "huge" IMO.
@harms main threat will be crosses from wide position. John Charles being the target, Muller playing off him and Robson arriving late to score from loose balls.
This play, however, will give your team the chance to counter. The crucial factor here is, are your CBs good enough to restrict Charles-Muller? I personally think they are, and the superior numbers in midfield and quality on the wings can take matters from there.
However, harms' team has a great work rate (Muller, Giggs, Becks). So they will open up in attack but also track back, which is why it is so difficult to call this game.
Charles - Muller is a bit underwhelming in all time context, though a perfect tactical fit.
I think we have more variety and option in our game going forward. Also we don't lack quality crossers, especially on the left flank - Stoichkov was one of the best crossers of the ball from that side.
It's not like we lack graft from Stoichkov, Kalle and Litmanen either.
Rio and Kohler are pretty much perfect pairing and also Kohler is also great fit for Charles. Add to that Schmeichel and his command in the area and his incredible saves and I think we're well suited for dealing with that danger.
Compared to Villa - Litmanen? I'm not sure.
Stoichkov/Kalle are the other forwards complimenting Villa, not Litmanen tho. Both Ballon D'or winners.
Litmanen is as an AM/#10 and part of the midfield, whilst of course danger going forward.
They are playing counter-attack though. Even so, I agree with the rest. Could be the deciding factor.
Agree. I was discussing harms' workrate because his side is the one which will have to deal with counter-attacks. Your team can manage defensively even if the wingers don't track back.
Yeah, we didn't really change our approach since the off but added/replaced players with in the same mold and of course characteristics
Thanks for the info
Same for the national teams BTW. Spain and England met couple of times (mostly friendlies) but still when Beckham was on the pitch Capdevila wasn't and vice versa.Thanks for the info
harms pretty much won the game so just out of curiosity whats the reason people gave him the advantage(think only mjj posted)? Surely its not only Beckham vs Capdevilla because that would be plain stupid.
It's not Beckham vs Capdevilla though, it's Beckham and Kaltz, which makes all the difference. As hardworking as Stoichkov was, he isn't going to track Kaltz to his own box. And if Netto is going to help, it would be a pretty much full-time job, which will left Coluna and Litmanen against Robson, Voronin and Müller (even if we discount Charles who also often dropped back to help his midfield and/or defence).
In my opinion my team wins in versatility and workrate. Plus I've got lucky that your best player (and probably the best on the park) is against Nilton Santos, and my doubled right wing is against your legacy pick.
As far as Giggs/more incisive winger against Capdevila goes - it's a fair point. But to be honest it's not Beckham, it'll probably be overlapping Kaltz who will tear him to shreads (again, in collective game where he would be torn between him and Becks).
That's my view of things.
That's a fair point but in the grand scheme of things we're going with counter attacking setup which means we'd sustain pressure. Having Stoichkov on that left flank on counter is pretty deadly to begin with.
That and of course Beckham and Kaltz are mainly providers rather than goalscorers from that flank, whilst in the box we have Rio and Kohler dealing with their final pass.
In a counter attacking set up we'll not let you have that much freedom on the right flank.
If the others who voted see it the same it's fair I guess, but I'd rather have a more goalscoring winger if it would be direct route to goal with Charles and Muller in the middle.
But if we are sitting back in our half and waiting, there isnt so much space to exploit via overlapping nor would Stoiichkov have to track so deep. But yeah, we agree that your right side is great and its an advantage but we also have advantages on other areas + Beckham and Kaltz getting the best out of our left side(Djimi Traore, Stoichkov and Netto) is only half a job, the other half is Muller and Charles getting the better of Rio, Kohler and Schmeichel.
And oh, not only we have Stoichkov we also have this beast tracking back, check this compilation and you see him tracking back all the way back to the fullback spot and the second the team won the ball he sprints back and outruns his man.
If harms wins this, will this be the 1st time we are having a 4-4-2 in a finals?
A great piece on Litmanen - well worth the read:
Where does the world-class talent of Jari Litmanen rank?
Finland, the land of a thousand lakes, is a socialist utopia. It’s a nation that leaves its people wanting for little. An egalitarian state with arguably the highest quality of life in the world. In Finland, their goals are 6×6, not 8×8, and their stars are hockey players and winter Olympians.
Jari Litmanen’s rise to prominence is, however, different to that of his peers. This is not the tale of bad kid come good, nor did he pull himself up by his bootstraps. Football was in his genetic makeup; his career smacked of a sense of pre-determinism. Simply put, it was the family business.
His father, Olavi, was a Finnish international and one-club man, spending his entire career with FC Lahti. His mother, too, was a footballer, playing for both the national side and FC Lahti, something which Jari would later do.
Young Jari, however, could not be shackled to the Veikkausliiga. Finland was familiar and it was safe, however there can be no prestige without mystery, as familiarity breeds contempt. Following his parents’ footsteps, he began playing for Lahti at the age of six. After 10 years in the youth set-up, he would finally make his long-awaited professional debut for his hometown club at 16.
It wouldn’t be until 1990 that FC Lahti would see ‘Litti’s’ predatory instincts, lurking like a shadow on the edge of the box, waiting for a slip or a moment of weakness.
Whilst at MYPA Jari reached the final of the Finnish Cup, and it would prove to be his only chance of silverware during his spell in his home nation. They would face FF Jaro in the Helsinki Olympic Stadium. Litmanen delighted in what was arguably the biggest game of his career to date as he scored and led his side to a 2-0 victory. More importantly, however, the Finn managed to attract the attention of a scout from Ajax; it was a move that would set in motion a relationship that would last almost a decade.
Louis van Gaal – the attacker’s new manager – and Litmanen worked side-by-side on their paths to greatness at Ajax. The enigmatic Dutchman and the somewhat stoic Finn’s relationship was not born out of design but forged out of necessity.
The 1990s were the wild west in terms of scouting; an unlawful town where disarray and chaos reigned. There was a sense that you never quite knew what – or who – you were signing. A proverbial game of Russian roulette.
After joining the Amsterdam giants, Jari initially failed to acclimatize to his new surroundings. Life as a 21-year-old attempting to find your way in the world can be a struggle at the best of times, but when you have moved from the industrial district of Kouvola to one of Europe’s most bohemian cities, time is needed.
• • • •
A young Litmanen in 1987
• • • •
He spent most of his first year at Ajax plying his trade for the club’s reserves as his favoured position – number 10, just off the striker – was being occupied by Dennis Bergkamp, a player who had ice flowing through his veins.
Early impressions suggested that van Gaal was somewhat unimpressed by his new signing, with his modesty mistaken for timidity. There was a sense around the club that Litmanen was overawed by the stature of Ajax.
His big break finally came not via the manager, but via the club’s physiotherapist, who believed Jari could take the place of Bergkamp after the Dutchman suffered an injury. Bergkamp’s future would eventually lie away from Amsterdam, with Milan his destination, and the club had a gaping hole that needed filling.
Van Gaal’s Ajax side was as utilitarian as it was stylish – this was not death by a thousand cuts, it was snarling, in your face football. Jari Litmanen was a key component of this philosophy. The team trumped all others and there was no room for the roaming nomad. Each player had their role, and they were expected to sacrifice themselves for the team.
Ajax’s number 10 had a unique role, offering the first line of defence by pressing the back line and midfield. Dutch football writers Kormelink and Seeverens believed that Litmanen “had to set an example by pursuing his opponent”. It meant that Jari’s abilities were, at first, somewhat stifled due to his defensive duties.
Litmanen’s second season would see him grow into a player who would lay waste to the league. He replaced Bergkamp, and then some. Scoring 26 goals – matching Bergkamp’s tally for the previous season – and creating countless others, Litmanen embodied the Johan Cruyff line that every disadvantage has an advantage in football. He wasn’t a player endowed with breakneck pace, nor was he particularly strong, but he let his instincts and self-confidence guide him. Litmanen was neurotic, but comfortably so.
Amsterdam danced to the beat of Louis’ men, and it was a two-year party that would cease to stop. The beer was sweeter and the air was cleaner when Ajax ruled the world. It was the rare instance where a team and its city were inexplicability linked. After all, this was a young, vibrant team with a young, Dutch core.
Winning the league in emphatic style, scoring 106 goals in the process, Ajax went unbeaten throughout the entire season. The team would grow exponentially, taking Europe by the throat. Ajax would go unbeaten through the Champions League group stage in 1994-95, beating Fabio Capello’s mighty Milan, AEK Athens and Salzburg along the way. They strolled through the tournament, demolishing Bayern Munich 5-2 in the semi-finals, with Litmanen scoring two.
On 24 May 1995, the swirling, haunting, synth beats of Vienna would fill the air as Ajax met Milan in the final. Milan were old heads at this final business, and this was their third final in as many years. Ajax were a side of young wastrels, who came not to play, but to win. The stadium was raucous with one set of fans in expectation, and the other in pure delirium.
Litmanen found his chances stifled throughout the game, with Marcel Desailly sticking to him like a shadow and was duly taken off in the 70th minute. He struggled to impact the final in the way that he did the group stage, however as time seemed to slow to a crawl and Patrick Kluivert stabbed home a late winner, none of that really mattered.
• • • •
Read | The Ajax utopia under Louis van Gaal
• • • •
Jari became the first Finn to lift the Champions League. At times he placed the team on his back and dragged them through with a mixture of skill and grit, and as the club’s leading scorer in the competition he had successfully led by example. He ended the season with 27 goals in all competitions, a Champions League winner’s medal, an Eredivisie title medal, and a Dutch Super Cup. It would never be so good again.
Litmanen’s purple patch, as well as Ajax’s, would continue into the 1995-96 season. The hangover was non-existent; van Gaal wouldn’t allow such unprofessionalism. Litmanen’s form was especially inspiring as he morphed into one of the games most deadly playmakers. A tenacious, quick-witted goalscorer with an eye for a pass, he was the perfect number 10. More importantly, his reputation in Amsterdam was growing, and the fans took to calling him ‘Merlin’ due to his unfathomable ability to drift between tackles.
The season would follow a very similar pattern to the last: Ajax would win the league and reach the Champions League final, however, this time, fate was not on Jari’s side. They would meet Italian opposition yet again but they couldn’t upset the odds, losing the final on penalties to Marcello Lippi’s Juventus.
Litmanen would end the tournament as top scorer with nine crucial goals, including one in the final. While it may have seemed like scant consolation at the time, he also finished third in the voting for the Ballon d’Or as he personal game reached its zenith.
Sadly for the mercurial Finn, his rapid ascent was met with an equally quick decline. For Litmanen, there would be no Indian Summer.
It takes years to build a reputation, however it takes months to destroy one. By 1999, Jari was no longer the cerebral lynch pin of Ajax’s side; he was a player whose body had begun to wilt under the immense strain that he put himself through each game. The Observer rather harshly noted in 2000 that Jari was “going the way of the Pope, making few appearances and looking more frail each time.” Whenever Litmanen did manage to get on to the pitch, he rarely fulfilled his role for the team – his body was simply not allowing him to play.
Louis van Gaal, having followed a well-trodden Dutch path to Barcelona, was trying recreate history, but by getting the old Ajax band back together – including Litmanen – he ultimately stagnated the present and failed to hit the heights that many expected.
As a result, a Catalan cull had begun in earnest and seven of those that departed were van Gaal’s men from the Ajax team of 1995. Spain wasn’t kind to Litmanen and his reputation was getting battered from all angles as he began to become an insular character. The waif that arrived in Amsterdam had returned. Injuries plague a player’s psych, they create self doubt in a way that nothing else can, and if you can’t trust your body, what can you trust?
His time in Barcelona also saw him called out in the press by van Gaal. The lionhearted Litmanen was apparently now shirking the cause: “Players count for nothing, the team is everything. I set more store by a player’s character than by his on-field qualities, and particularly whether he is willing to give everything to the cause.”
Van Gaal’s sacking would leading to Jari being frozen out in the Catalan sun and Lorenzo Serra Ferrer duly allowed the Finnish international to leave on a free transfer to Liverpool. His pilgrimage to Merseyside would end in yet more heartbreak for a genius struggling to find actuality.
• • • •
Litmanen in action for Liverpool against Roma
• • • •
His pilgrimage to Merseyside would end in yet more heartbreak for a genius struggling to find actuality. He eulogised about his love for Liverpool, and asked for the iconic 7 shirt, however with Vladimír Šmicer occupying it, he was left with 37.
Injuries betwixt with sporadic brilliance would be the story of Litmanen at Liverpool, with a few notable goals putting a somewhat sunny disposition on a difficult period. It was a time of immense frustration for Jari; when Gérard Houllier had signed him, he waxed lyrical about “the world-class player” who had arrived at Melwood.
Once again, however, his fitness was called into question, with Houllier saying he couldn’t complete 90 minutes. While he spent each of the three finals that season in the treatment room, he did have some influence on those in Merseyside. A 16-year-old Wayne Rooney would be exposed to the attacking star and later dubbed him as the player he enjoyed watching most. Rooney would wonder, “how did he make that space for himself”, as the player once called Merlin would shimmy and glide out of danger.
His later career would see him return to Ajax, and then back home to Finland where it was dubbed the “return of the king”. It was perhaps ironic that a player who struggled to overcome injuries during his best years would end up playing until 40 at club level and retire with 137 national caps to unequivocally become the greatest Finnish player of all time.
Paul Simpson of FourFourTwo once wrote that Jari Litmanen’s career “had not been worthy of his talent” – and he couldn’t have put it better. Despite the setbacks, he was a player of immense quality, a lionheart made of glass, complete with talent that places him amongst the true greats of the game. Simply put, his ability cannot be called into question.
He was a special breed of playmaker, a player born out of Johan Cruyff’s counter-intuitive liberal theories. He was not the artist playmaker – Jari was the antithesis of modern art – but he was functional and brilliant. He was an everyman.
The mark he left on his nation is enormous; in a country where ice hockey reigned supreme, he inspired players to leave the frozen tundra for the greener pastures of a football pitch. In his hometown of Lahti stands a statue of Kuningas (Jari the king).
How does one measure true greatness? A swollen trophy cabinet? Perhaps. I would argue that greatness is the impact that you leave on your peers, and the ability to use your career to inspire people to see the game in a new way. In the 1990s, as consumerism and individuality became king, Litmanen sacrificed himself to the cause and did it with an abundance of grace and poise.
Whether he is an all-time great in the grand scheme of things probably depends on how you view the game and your definition of greatness.
By Tom Fahy
I think it is. That and perhaps Villa being underrated? I think there's always been a tendency to underrate Villa. He and Litmanen combining with quick one-twos to release wingers was the reason I gave your team the edge.
There's also the fact that harms has some of our favorites in that team. Heck, if I hadn't really thought about it, I'd vote for him too!
Hmm, on second thoughts..
We also have some of ours - Rio and Schmeichel.
Most of the caf was creaming their pants over Villa when he was at the top of his game from memories.
There is some underrating of him in an all time context.
Maybe the current memories and close to retirement and his time at Atletico has washed some memories, but when he was on, he was really on. His peak came at Valencia obviously but even with Barca he had some special moments:
Think villa shoot himself in the foot when he went to barca, sounds stupid as he won everything there and proved himself on the highest stage but his player legacy took the hit with him only being support player to messi rather then being the main guy of the top team(which he would be in any other team) playing in his best position. Wouldnt be surprised if suarez goes as the better player in history and for me he isnt, id take villa any day of the week even if we ignore all non playing crap from suarez.
@Enigma_87 How similar do you find Müller to Litmanen? I find him the second coming of Merlin. Less technically blessed, perhaps, but fitter. Both were LvG favorites as well.
The biggest compliment for Villa would be that Spain never found another striker so suited to their game. Villa is the guy who converted their tiki-taka into goals. Seeing how terrible somebody like Diego Costa can look in that role or the fact that only Messi could do it better really says everything. He deserves to be the face of 'Spanish forward.'
Edit: by that logic, would you say Neymar should leave Barcelona?
Hmm, interesting question.
Both LvG favorites no doubt. Both tactically sound and with high work rate. I rate Litmanen a above Muller in the technical, vision and playmaking department and also a more of a goalscorer.
Muller on the other hand as you mentioned is stronger and less injury prone.
Litmanen was a special player in a sense it's difficult to replicate his style and oomph on the pitch, whilst Muller is a typical German player (you can't get more German name either) and is pretty clutch performer. He's more versatile as he'd occupy various positions on the pitch.
Muller is a bit faster as well, but Litmanen is the better dribbler and generally the more creative player, especially in a central role.
They can play both in a team with Litmanen at #10/SS or even withdrawn role and Muller on the right channel for example.
The most amazing thing about Litmanen was he had the technical ability of a playmaker, the eye of a goal-scorer and the workrate of a water carrier. No wonder his body couldn't keep up.
Müller comes close in the latter two but yes, he usually needs others to create moves.
I think Viva won or at least get to the final with 4-4-2
When I've got 1995 Ajax to replicate in the remake draft, I picked Müller for Litmanen without a second thought. Their movement is very similar.
Not really no, its a different situation. Messi changed his game drastically so now another attacking player like Neymar is having a much more freedom and a much different role(in terms of importance) in the team + he plays in his natural position while Villa was pushed out wide.
btw congrats @harms , good luck in the final.
Tonight, I will find the time to comment seriously your game; not because my point of view matters but because I know how frustrating it is for a manager to see a lack of comments from neutrals.
Thanks for the game, @Enigma_87 and @Šjor Bepo. Looking forward to seeing Litmanen's compilation when I'll get home.
Two lovely sides and I couldn't really seperate them, so the score-line is a bit surprising as I expected it to be closer.
harms attack is lovely to say the least with 2 brilliant flanks and the fantastic combo of Charles-Muller. In saying that though, and as much as I see harms gaining the edge down the flanks, Enigma/Sjor had a truly brilliant defensive duo shielding their rear-guard, and Kohler's stringent man-marking skills in lieu with Ferdinand's astute reading of the game, squared up really well against Charles's game and Muller's elusive movement. That's a majority of his threat negated, but if there was one thing I didn't like about Sjor/Enigma's side it was the Netto-Coluna pairing. Tbf, I don't really know too much about Netto but by all accounts they both seemed to overlap a wee bit and seem like the sort who'd be better off alongside a Voronin for instance. Thus, envisioned Robson as harms potential tie-breaker, with his classic runs into the box from deep. Granted, he is playing in a midfield duo against a trio, but Robson has a heavy-weight DM in Voronin behind him and of course, the sheer industry of Beckham and Giggs in midfield, in combination with Muller too. That should afford him some freedom imo.
On the other hand, Enigma/Sjor would have gotten some joy with the Villa-Stoichkov combo. Villa is a phenomenal all-round forward but one who was easily capable of inter-changing at ease and thriving in a fluid forward line, as he had the link-up play and threat outside the box to function as a fluid centre-forward (just like he did for Valencia, and to a certain extent Barca but with less freedom). harms back-line was more of a back 3 with Kaltz playing the attacking role imo. Whilst McGrath is a great fit for Stoichkov cutting in and N.Santos a good fit for Rummenigge's game on the right, Ayala might have just been found a little wanting against the sheer trickery and movement of that ridiculously fluid forward trio (all three being at ease in any of those 3 positions up front). And there was no lack for creativity with a really crafty midfield trio. That's without mentioning the fact that all three of the forwards were capable of both being the suppliers and finishers. Also another key aspect which went under the carpet was that whilst Beckham-Giggs were outrageously great at working the flanks both defensively and offensively, Stoichkov-Kalle weren't so shabby either and both were pretty industrious forwards (including Villa too). Of course, you'd give the classic 4-4-2 with 2 wide midfielders/wingers the edge in this regard, but Sjor/Enigma's side weren't too far behind in terms of covering ground and defending as a unit etc.
So yeah, ultimately it was Robbo for harms and of course, the Villa-Stoichkov duo for Sjor/Enigma. Couldn't decide but might have voted if a different sort of midfielder to Netto was there and likewise, a different CB to Ayala. Don't get me wrong, Enigma/Sjor's midfield is brilliant and I could be wrong on Netto (perhaps @harms could enlighten me here) and Ayala-McGrath is a great complementary pairing, nothing wrong with either of those combinations - just felt they potentially could have been exploited in this game given the respective oppositions.
harms attack is lovely to say the least with 2 brilliant flanks and the fantastic combo of Charles-Muller. In saying that though, and as much as I see harms gaining the edge down the flanks, Enigma/Sjor had a truly brilliant defensive duo shielding their rear-guard, and Kohler's stringent man-marking skills in lieu with Ferdinand's astute reading of the game, squared up really well against Charles's game and Muller's elusive movement. That's a majority of his threat negated, but if there was one thing I didn't like about Sjor/Enigma's side it was the Netto-Coluna pairing. Tbf, I don't really know too much about Netto but by all accounts they both seemed to overlap a wee bit and seem like the sort who'd be better off alongside a Voronin for instance. Thus, envisioned Robson as harms potential tie-breaker, with his classic runs into the box from deep. Granted, he is playing in a midfield duo against a trio, but Robson has a heavy-weight DM in Voronin behind him and of course, the sheer industry of Beckham and Giggs in midfield, in combination with Muller too. That should afford him some freedom imo.
On the other hand, Enigma/Sjor would have gotten some joy with the Villa-Stoichkov combo. Villa is a phenomenal all-round forward but one who was easily capable of inter-changing at ease and thriving in a fluid forward line, as he had the link-up play and threat outside the box to function as a fluid centre-forward (just like he did for Valencia, and to a certain extent Barca but with less freedom). harms back-line was more of a back 3 with Kaltz playing the attacking role imo. Whilst McGrath is a great fit for Stoichkov cutting in and N.Santos a good fit for Rummenigge's game on the right, Ayala might have just been found a little wanting against the sheer trickery and movement of that ridiculously fluid forward trio (all three being at ease in any of those 3 positions up front). And there was no lack for creativity with a really crafty midfield trio. That's without mentioning the fact that all three of the forwards were capable of both being the suppliers and finishers. Also another key aspect which went under the carpet was that whilst Beckham-Giggs were outrageously great at working the flanks both defensively and offensively, Stoichkov-Kalle weren't so shabby either and both were pretty industrious forwards (including Villa too). Of course, you'd give the classic 4-4-2 with 2 wide midfielders/wingers the edge in this regard, but Sjor/Enigma's side weren't too far behind in terms of covering ground and defending as a unit etc.
So yeah, ultimately it was Robbo for harms and of course, the Villa-Stoichkov duo for Sjor/Enigma. Couldn't decide but might have voted if a different sort of midfielder to Netto was there and likewise, a different CB to Ayala. Don't get me wrong, Enigma/Sjor's midfield is brilliant and I could be wrong on Netto (perhaps @harms could enlighten me here) and Ayala-McGrath is a great complementary pairing, nothing wrong with either of those combinations - just felt they potentially could have been exploited in this game given the respective oppositions.
Said this lots of times already, but didn't want to derail this thread. Netto is really one of the best choices for the LCM role in a diamond (where he really exploits his left-ish positioning and not just playing on the left in a midfield two), a more attacking/playmaking version of Davids, or a bit more defensive Masopust, but people keep putting him as a holding midfielder. With Coluna and not the genuine holding midfielder here the balanced seemed off — especially since Coluna (justifiably so) was put a bit higher.
I don’t think Kaltz supporting Beckham is the best solution in a perfect 4-4-2.
Good team, though.
But Kaltz’ main claim to fame isn’t something he’d realistically get to showcase here much, unless Beckham is supposed to play a more subdued role (which would seem absurd).
Kaltz isn’t Neville on steroids by any stretch, he’s a different sort of player.
Good team, though.
But Kaltz’ main claim to fame isn’t something he’d realistically get to showcase here much, unless Beckham is supposed to play a more subdued role (which would seem absurd).
Kaltz isn’t Neville on steroids by any stretch, he’s a different sort of player.
I agree that they aren't 100% perfect together, and he was originally picked to play behind Figo — who had a bit more variety to his game and often moved centrally. The Neville comparison was more about their double crossing threat — both are capable of crossing from basically any point of the pitch and the fullback can't man-mark one of them as both are intelligent enough to pass the ball to other; like when teams closely marked Becks, unmarked Neville stepped up
Aye, Kaltz didn't seem like a prodigious overlapper to me in the Cafu or even Neville mould, and did much of his best attacking work from deeper areas. It's still a fine flank, but somewhat less than the sum of its parts IMO. I also think that Stoichkov would have given him alot of problems defensively, although McGrath provides brilliant cover.
Yes - and was more of an actual attacker in his own right, to put it like that.
Which comes at a price. He was relatively sound defensively (had to be, back then, even as a "pure" wingback) but less so than Neville (to bring him up again), who was defensively sound first and a supportive attacker second (which is what you ideally want in a 4-4-2 if your actual wide midfielder is any good).
@harms He'd work better with Figo, no doubt - less of an overlap there in terms of, well, crossing and such, they'd constitute a more varied combo. I get the idea of having two brilliant crossers - but it looks odd to me, all things said and done. It's an extreme measure, since both Kaltz and Beckham are specialist crossers, both from the right. Kaltz isn't a well rounded right back in an all-time context who also happens to be a great crosser - he is a great crosser, that's his thing, first and foremost. And Beckham's most conspicuous strength is exactly the same - so, yeah, there's something off there.
Details, of course.
I like the team, as such, very much. And just to make it clear, Kaltz isn't a headless chicken defensively - that's not what I'm saying at all. He's clearly capable of playing as a RB in a four in a more "well rounded" way - but that's not what he's famous for, and this is all-time, etc.
I had Kaltz similar to Carlos Alberto.
To be honest that's where I'm not in full agreement with you. His game was much more than that — it included dribbling, shooting, very good passing (that's what surprised me the first time I watched him closely, after all that cross-related praise I've read), and his defensive reading of the game was enough for him to be played as a sweeper in post-Beckenbauer's Germany. It's just that his crosses are most famous, with that banana-name and Hrubesch and everything. He is a brilliant predominantly attacking fullback, with a great variety in his game, in an all-time context.