Remake Draft R16 | Brwned vs Kazi

[Joga Bonito]

Voters are asked to consider the XIs featured as remakes of classic teams, and to consider to what extent the manager has succeeded in re-creating both the individual roles and the overall functionality of the original. THIS IS NOT A FANTASY MATCH BETWEEN TWO SIDES, but rather a comparison of remakes.

Please feel free to tag the managers if you require more information about their set-ups/players etc.

Team Brwned:

Philosophy/Ideology of tactical set-up

Functional. Organised. Hard-working. They are the three key components of the 1966 World Cup team, and as a result they’re still seen today as critical components in the ideal English player. No fancy-dan #10s coasting about the field letting others do the work - the ideal is another Bobby Charlton, a truly complete player. That overarching philosophy exists right across the team.

There was nothing truly unique about this team - it was simply a collection of very capable individuals who were happy to sacrifice themselves for the team and create a whole better than the sum of its parts. That’s where England’s golden generation fell down, trying to fit in too many superstars and too many square pegs in round holes. Here we have the core of the golden generation with the addition of some selfless, tireless, multifunctional players to balance the team.
​

Style - Direct​

​

Defense​

Defensive Line - Normal
Marking - Man-marking
Off the ball - Aggressive closing down
On the ball - Build up Play/Rapid transitions through sweeper/Basic & risk-free passing to midfield etc

In the back four we have a unique proposition - a back four that knows each other’s games inside out and proved to be formidable against the toughest opponents. Jackie Charlton and Bobby Moore were your typical stopper-sweeper partnership and the foundation of that partnership was a telephathic understanding of where their partner is and how they would react in any situation. Wilson was one of the stalwarts in the team; very experienced and incredibly reliable. Cohen was the last to join that back four, integrating fully in the team just a year before the World Cup, but he slotted in seamlessly and was tasked with providing width in a team that played with no wingers.
​

Midfield​

In midfield, we have a combination of steel, energy, intelligence and class, but above all else a level of cohesion that brings out the best of everyone’s distinct talents. Stiles was the typical destroyer, shuttting down everything that got in his way. Ahead of Stiles you had three players that all had fundamentally the same role - support the attack, support the defence, knit the play together. They were a trio of all-rounders.
​

Attack​

In attack we have two tireless #9s - one excelling as a target man, the other as a constant threat in behind. Their role when the team's in possession is to stretch the opposition defence every which way, pulling out wide into the space or darting in behind at every opportunity. On the ball, their incessant running and defending from the front is critical in setting the tone for the team and forcing the opposition defence and midfield to concede possession easily.
​

Player Roles​

In goal we have Joe Hart replacing the legendary Gordon Banks. Both play a significant role in the team through their personalities alone, and both capable of exceptional reaction saves and impossible saves 1-on-1. Fundamentally they are both exponents of a traditional goalkeeping style.

At left back we have Ashley Cole replacing Wilson, a man remembered by many as the first modern fullback. Whilst that may be a bit of English exaggeration - there were many before him - it is true that his role in the team was that of the modern fullback. Provide width on the flanks, support in attack at every opportunity and inject energy into the team. However a fullback’s #1 priority then was defence first. Ashley Cole fits that role perfectly. Cohen’s role was much the same on the opposing flank, with Gary Neville suitably stepping in to replace Cohen’s dangerous crosses. Rio Ferdinand is Bobby Moore’s only peer in English football, displaying the same combination of elegance, intelligence and immaculate timing. Jackie Charlton was your typical English bruiser; a brave, combative, tireless defender with real strength in the air. Terry slots into that role with ease.

Stiles was a warrior, a terrier, very quick across the ground and incessantly nibbling at people’s feet before playing the easy ball onto his more talented counterparts. Hargreaves fulfilled that role for club and country with aplomb, introducing himself to the world with a sterling man-marking job on Pablo Aimar in the 2000 UCL final, and re-introducing himself to the English public in 2006 as their player of the tournament.

Bobby Charlton was equally capable of being the matchwinner (vs. Portugal in the semi-final) or sacrificing himself for the team and man-marking the oppostion’s key player (vs. Beckenbauer in the final). He was the figurehead of the midfield and attack in one, an all-rounder with a responsibility to score the important goals in the important moments.

Ball was a tireless worker, and is remembered for his endless energy, but on top of that he was a very intelligent passer and very cleverly found space in a crowded midfield. He was a supporting player in every sense of the word, and in every phase of the game. Win the ball back, drive forward in possession, pick out a simple but incisive pass in attack. Noble has displayed all of these qualities for a decade and last season he showed what he was capable of doing in a team with real quality - he was simultaneously the supporting playmaker (behind Payet) and the energiser. He was also the least experienced player in the team, seen by many as a gamble but in reality turned out to be an essential component.

Peters was described by Sir Alf Ramsey as being a player ahead of his time. Intelligent, perceptive, creative, elegant and with plenty of skill. The essential element is that he was hard-working on top of that. He was also one of the youngsters in the team with just a few caps to his name, but by the time he’d finished his first game in the tournament he’d made it clear he was a critical component with his creative influence and goal threat. Dele Alli has been described as all of the same things over the past season. A precocious talent with a great combination of physique and technique with a tireless workrate.

Hunt is remembered by Liverpool fans as one of the superstars of the era and one of their heroes, a tremendous goalscorer. He’s remembered by England fans as an awkward workhorse who scored some important goals. George Hurst is remembered fundamentally the same way. Both players worked tirelessly for the time, defending from the front, pulling out wide and running in behind, fighting for every lost cause. Harry Kane and Jamie Vardy have displayed all of the same qualities throughout their careers with the goalscoring touch to match.​

 

[Joga Bonito]

England 1966/Sir Alf Ramsey (4-1-3-2)......../....................Brwned's Modern Remake

 

[Joga Bonito]

Team Kazi:

Philosophy & Style

Dominate possession with quick passing and movement, with an emphasis on wingplay, especially down the right side. Allow the forwards to express themselves when in advanced areas of the pitch, with a solid base set by the more experienced players at the back. The midfield playmaker is at the heart of most attacking phases.

Defense

The defensive line is higher than average. Both centre-backs are man-markers; the RCB (Bellini) was more aggressive in stopping the opposition forward, while the LCB (Orlando) used more of his exception positional sense and anticipation to do his job. Bellini put it simply: "There was nothing extraordinary about our defensive methods, I took it upon myself to tackle an opponent entering the defence from our right, a striker from the left being handled by Orlando." The full-backs would tuck in during the defensive phase of play, and would regularly deal with forwards that find pockets in between the CB and full-back. Behind them, the keeper (Gilmar) was a calm, composed figure known for his reflex saves.

Going forward, the centre-backs looked for the simple pass out wide to the full-backs or occasionally to one of the midfielders. The full-backs would drive the ball forward and regularly start attacks. They would advance when in possession and tuck in as wide midfielders alongside the midfield two, with the LB (Nilton Santos) being the more adventurous. They would support the wingers in attack but seldom go on over-lapping runs.

Midfield

The ’58 team would play with a Volante and a box-to-box playmaker. The Volante (Zito), a position that got its name from Argentian Carlos Volante, would sit in front of the back four. The Volante wasn’t a hard player or a tough tackler, but he was highly organised, intercepted when necessary and looked to start attacks through quick transitions of play; getting the ball forward to the box-to-box playmaker as quickly as possible.

The box-to-box playmaker (Didi) was at the heart of most things going forward. He would drive the ball forward from midfield into attack, spread the ball to the wings, look to produce quick interplay with the Volante and the inside-left, all while doing some of the dirty work when his team didn’t have the ball. He orchestrated the attack and was the leader behind the talented front-line. The inside-left (Pele) would occasionally drop into midfield too to help initiate attacks.

Attack

The attack was spear-headed by the striker (Vava). He was an absolute fox-in-the-box, finishing everything that’d fall to his feet when in the penalty area. He had excellent movement, always found himself in space and occasionally involved himself in build-up play. Alongside him is the inside-left (Pele). The inside-left did it all as a forward, he had a great understanding with his striker partner and midfield playmaker which allowed him to create chances and feed off of the talents of the players around him, his individual brilliance and rawness allowed him to create magic on his own while also being a threat in the box, regularly being at the end of crosses from the wingers.

Outside-right (Garrincha) is where the Brazilians spent most of its attack, which is understandable when you see who’s playing there. The outside-right was not a goal-scorer in 1958, he was an unbelievable dribbler who time after time would beat the opposing left-back one-on-one and create chance after chance for the forwards. Those crosses would occasionally be swept up by the outside-left (Zagallo), who would pose the same threat on the opposite but to a lesser extent.

Specific Tactical Manoeuvres

As Bellini said, there was nothing complex about their defending; they all had a job and did it to the best of their abilities. Brazil’s forward play is what set themselves apart from the competition in 1958. There were three frequent ways in which Brazil would create chances and score goals:

• Down the right hand side. The outside-right (Garrincha) would collect the ball, usually from the midfield playmaker or right-back, beat his man one-on-one and get the ball in the box. The two forwards (Vava, Pele) and occasionally the outside-left (Zagallo) would be at the end of those crosses, tucking them away.​
• Quick interplay through the centre of the pitch. This would come from the midfield playmaker (Didi) and the inside-left (Pele) who had a brilliant understanding, and occasionally the striker (Vava) would join in too. Their quick one and two touch passing and highly energetic movements would pierce holes in the opposition defences, eventually leading to one of the forwards having a chance one-on-one with the keeper.​
• Individual brilliance from the inside-left (Pele). The inside-left was a raw talent in 1958, give him the ball and occasionally he’d waste an opportunity, but many times he’d create magic on his own; leaving defenders for dead and starting his ridiculous goal-scoring record for his country.​

Player Roles

Gilmar / Iker Casillas: It was important I got Casillas here. What stands out about Gilmar is his personality; he was a leader but also a remarkably calm figure, and no one represents this sort of personality more than Casillas in the modern game. They also both share other similar traits, such as being left-footed and fine shot-stoppers, known for their incredible reflexes.

Djalma Santos / Marquinhos: This one will raise a few eyebrows. It was near impossible to get a proper right-back with high technical ability when on the ball. Right-back isn’t Marquinhos preferred position (I don’t think) but his positional versatility has allowed him to show that he has the skill-set to represent his fellow countryman.

Bellini / Nemanja Vidic: Bellini was an aggressive man-marker who always aimed to be first to the ball; Vidic fits the bill. Bellini was also the captain of the ’58 side but is very rarely given credit for his leadership, with the likes of Didi, Nilton Santos, Zito and Gilmar being cited as the leaders of the team. Some may say this is reminiscent of Vidic as United captain. He wore the armband, but often there were players in the XI that were just as responsible for leading the team (e.g. Rio, Evra, Giggs). If anything, he let his actions do the talking as captain.

Orlando / Gabriel Milito: Orlando was also a man-marker, but relied more on his positional sense and anticipation when acting as a stopper. Gabriel Milito fits well here; neither were that gifted physically for a centre-back, Milito especially not post-injury, but his positioning as a defender was second-to-none.

Nilton Santos / Patrice Evra: Nilton Santos revolutionised the full-back position, and Evra embodies the modern full-back as good as one can. They weren’t the types to go on overlapping runs, but would support their winger by joining the midfield, getting crosses in from less advanced positions than the wingers and generally trying to be a part of attacks; their technical ability allowed them to do this. Evra in his prime also showed the defensive skills required to fill the boots of Nilton Santos, consistently tracking the runs of the opposition forwards in the pockets.

Zito / Michael Carrick: The Volante. Both highly organised, both brilliant positionally and both very good passers of the ball. They protect their back four in silent but effective ways. In my opinion, Carrick is one of the two best players available in the pool for Zito’s role.

Didi / Luka Modric: Exceptional playmakers with box-to-box abilities, Modric is the #1 choice for Didi in the pool of players available. It doesn’t really need explaining, the similarities between the two are extremely obvious.

Garrincha / Joaquin: When I was first handed Brazil 1958, Garrincha was the player who was giving me the most trouble. What it came down to was looking at Garrincha’s most crucial aspects of his game in ’58; his dribbling and how often he created chances down the right. It made the choice extremely easy. The more you think about it, the more Joaquin makes sense.

Vava / Robert Lewandowski: Lewandowski is a proper old fashioned centre forward who scores loads of goals, just like Vava. It’s uncanny how similar these two look when they’re inside the box. Their movement is similar, their finishing is similar and they are both highly composed individuals.

Pele / David Villa: Positionally, David Villa is a perfect fit for Pele. He’s also shown the skills needed to fill this role throughout his career. He has the ability to beat a man and score goals on his own. He’s shown that he can be extremely effective with his passing and movement in build-up play; his time at Barcelona and the Spain National Team developed this side of his game. He also showed his ruthlessness inside the box, especially during his time at Valencia. The only thing I would say here that holds Villa back is maybe his slight lack of adventure, Pele in ’58 was still a kid and still a raw talent, whereas Villa at his best would not take as many chances on the ball.

Zagallo / Vicente: Both left-footed left-sided players, both extremely good crossers of the ball, both players of high stamina and both have an eye for goal.

 

[Joga Bonito]

Brazil 1958 - Feola (4-2-4)................................................................../.............................Kazi's Modern Remake

 

[Joga Bonito]

Good luck gents

@Brwned @Kazi

 

[Brwned]

The one major issue I have is the attack. Joaquin is a perfect replacement for Garrincha and Lewandowski can do everything Vava did, and more. The other two choices don't make sense to me on a number of levels. Pelé wasn't the patient, controlled playmaker that he was in 1970 but he was still a #10. He connected the midfield and attack. I don't see Villa excelling in that role at all. He can provide the goals but Pelé provided the impetus in the attack, the genius.

More importantly I can't see Vicente stepping into Zagallo's role at all. They were both left wingers but the comparison ends there, for me. Zagallo was a critical component of the only Brazil team to win back-to-back World Cups and his role was very distinct. He was fundamentally a supporting player, but that only serves to understate his importance. He allowed Nilton Santos to burst forward in the knowledge that Zagallo would cover for him and that he would drift inside to create space, and he allowed Didi to move forward into the #10 role knowing that Zagallo would tuck inside to make sure they're compact and not outnumbered. He essentially played the role Giggs did in 06/07 - a playmaking inside forward who supported both the midfield and his left back. Vicente can't do that.

Perhaps I'm wrong but from what I remember Zito was a steely midfield general, a one-man midfield almost. Didi was essentially a #10 playing from deep and did very little defensive work. I suppose Modric's work-rate compensates for that.

 

[Joga Bonito]

The one major issue I have is the attack. Joaquin is a perfect replacement for Garrincha and Lewandowski can do everything Vava did, and more. The other two choices don't make sense to me on a number of levels. Pelé wasn't the patient, controlled playmaker that he was in 1970 but he was still a #10. He connected the midfield and attack. I don't see Villa excelling in that role at all. He can provide the goals but Pelé provided the impetus in the attack, the genius.

Agreed with this, it must have been hard remaking Pele but perhaps someone more well rounded and physical could have been better - Rooney as Kazi himself stated in the thread and I could have seen the Pool version of Suarez doing a decent job at remaking Pelé too.

More importantly I can't see Vicente stepping into Zagallo's role at all. They were both left wingers but the comparison ends there, for me. Zagallo was a critical component of the only Brazil team to win back-to-back World Cups and his role was very distinct. He was fundamentally a supporting player, but that only serves to understate his importance. He allowed Nilton Santos to burst forward in the knowledge that Zagallo would cover for him and that he would drift inside to create space, and he allowed Didi to move forward into the #10 role knowing that Zagallo would tuck inside to make sure they're compact and not outnumbered. He essentially played the role Giggs did in 06/07 - a playmaking inside forward who supported both the midfield and his left back. Vicente can't do that.

Indeed, Zagallo was an unique tactical cocktail and a quality player to boot. Can't see Vicente remaking Zagallo's role to perfection but you do have to take into consideration that it is the 1958 remake and not that the 1962 version where his role as an LW/LAM was more pronounced. Still, would have preferred a more tactically savvy and industrious player there - ala di Maria - but Vicente definitely ain't a shabby remake of Zagallo's wingsmanship on the ball.

I personally appreciate Modric for Didi and I think Modric has the skillset to replicate Didi role to a good extent - excellent dribbler, playmaker and with notable technique etc. Wasn't exactly a fan of Evra for N.Santos initially but remaking the full-back's playmaking tendencies and wingsmanship was always going to be a tough ask. I've always appreciated Evra's intelligence on the ball and he's always been a fairly prominent presence in the build-up phase for us imo - not just of the pure 'running and grafting wing-back' ilk but definitely a fairly cerebral player who had good inter-play and technique on the ball.

Overall a nice effort.



For the England 1966, I think it's a pretty astute remake all in all. Gerrard for Charlton is bit of an acquired taste but it's seriously difficult to pin-point a modern player who could fill the boots of Sir Bobby Charlton. In that sense, covering as many facets of Charlton would be the way to go, and Gerrard is a wise choice in that aspect. Would certainly love modern player suggestions from others for remaking Charlton's role as I practically can't think of any.

There is one issue that I have with the side though, Noble for Ball. Noble is definitely an industrious player but he was rather slow off the mark and doesn't quite have the dynamism or the relentless 'hounding' ability that Alan Ball had imo. It was actually outrageous the number of times Ball recovered the ball in the middle for England with his relentless pressing and how he nullified the likes of Schnelliger and Marzolini with his boundless reserves of energy. Can't see Noble pulling that off imo but he definitely is a team player and a fairly astute user of the ball, which were also key facets to Ball's game.

The defense is spot on (apart from perhaps a more technical and attacking player than Cole for Wilson maybe) and there's lots to like about the side overall. The modern side as a whole resonates with the same grit and team ethic that wingless wonders possessed imo.

 

[Ecstatic]

 

[Kazi]

The one major issue I have is the attack. Joaquin is a perfect replacement for Garrincha and Lewandowski can do everything Vava did, and more. The other two choices don't make sense to me on a number of levels. Pelé wasn't the patient, controlled playmaker that he was in 1970 but he was still a #10. He connected the midfield and attack. I don't see Villa excelling in that role at all. He can provide the goals but Pelé provided the impetus in the attack, the genius.

More importantly I can't see Vicente stepping into Zagallo's role at all. They were both left wingers but the comparison ends there, for me. Zagallo was a critical component of the only Brazil team to win back-to-back World Cups and his role was very distinct. He was fundamentally a supporting player, but that only serves to understate his importance. He allowed Nilton Santos to burst forward in the knowledge that Zagallo would cover for him and that he would drift inside to create space, and he allowed Didi to move forward into the #10 role knowing that Zagallo would tuck inside to make sure they're compact and not outnumbered. He essentially played the role Giggs did in 06/07 - a playmaking inside forward who supported both the midfield and his left back. Vicente can't do that.

Perhaps I'm wrong but from what I remember Zito was a steely midfield general, a one-man midfield almost. Didi was essentially a #10 playing from deep and did very little defensive work. I suppose Modric's work-rate compensates for that.

I was never going to get someone who possesses all of the qualities of Pele. But in '58, I rank his goal-getting and his individual brilliance on the ball above his link-up play between midfield and attack, which is why I went for Villa. Pele was more of a second striker / central winger than a #10 in '58, most of the playmaking in the advanced areas of the pitch was done by Didi.

The pool was short of left-footed left wingers. I agree that Zagallo would tuck inside to allow Didi to get forward; Vicente may fall short here. However, from what I saw of Zagallo in '58, he hardly covered for Nilton Santos. I understand this was a bigger part of his game in the '62 World Cup, but in '58, he would almost always find himself in advanced areas of the pitch. Perhaps not as forward as Garrincha on the other side, but definitely not someone who was intent on tracking back to cover for his full-back.

As for Zito, I didn't see much steel to his game. I said Carrick was one of the two best players in the pool to remake him. My #1 choice was Busquets; Carrick is maybe a bit shy when it comes to tackling, but apart from that, I'm happy with with Carrick taking the Zito role.

 

[harms]

Gerrard as Charlton is a huge turn-off for me. The gap in their football intellect and the selflessness, which is noted as one of the main qualities of 66's side in the OP, is the last word that I would chose to describe Steve Me, really.

I admire the dedication to the theme and to the idea of picking only English players though. But even from the English pool I would've picked Wilshere over Gerrard, despite him being an inferior player.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Pele is not replicable at all, but I don't see Villa replicating the role at all. He is not the playmaker in a sense Pele was. I know it's a controversial statement but would Rooney have been better in that role? Or maybe Mata, who played in similar role with Drogba upfront. Not really sure.

Zagallo was a important link in the left that made the formation tick. Vincente is not close. And Carrick.... As from being a DLP I don't see any similarities in the game.

As for Brwned team, Hargreaves is a weird choice for a destroyer. I read his explanation before, but still have my concerns. He doesn't have the tenacity nor sheer ruthlessness of Stiles (whom I really adore). Such a crucial yet overlooked part in the team. I don't see him as a man marker at all. Some further info will be appreciated.

Compared to Kazi it's a relatively easy temperature for Brwned excepting Charlton. Defensive line is nice! Can't fault Rio in Moore role, but Terry in Charlton role doesn't sit well. Still OK in general I suppose.

 

[Ecstatic]

I understand Pelé started his career as an inside poweful forward, striker, and later became known as a playmaker.

The best replacement of Pelé version 58 would have been a sharp striker very mobile like Ronaldo.

In spite of appearances, I can understand the rationale regarding the choice of Villa: a striker able to roam around the penalty area.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

The best replacement of Pelé version 58 would have been a sharp striker very mobile like Ronaldo.

The Fenomeno?

 

[Ecstatic]

The Fenomeno?

Jose Mourinho: 'I coached the real Ronaldo, the Brazilian Ronaldo'

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Jose Mourinho: 'I coached the real Ronaldo, the Brazilian Ronaldo'

He's a complete striker, but still falls short of the creativeness of Pelé imo. I'd go for a proper second striker. Totti, Rooney and the like. Sarosi, Litmanen, even Baggio or Simonsen.

 

[Annahnomoss]

The one major issue I have is the attack. Joaquin is a perfect replacement for Garrincha and Lewandowski can do everything Vava did, and more. The other two choices don't make sense to me on a number of levels. Pelé wasn't the patient, controlled playmaker that he was in 1970 but he was still a #10. He connected the midfield and attack. I don't see Villa excelling in that role at all. He can provide the goals but Pelé provided the impetus in the attack, the genius.

More importantly I can't see Vicente stepping into Zagallo's role at all. They were both left wingers but the comparison ends there, for me. Zagallo was a critical component of the only Brazil team to win back-to-back World Cups and his role was very distinct. He was fundamentally a supporting player, but that only serves to understate his importance. He allowed Nilton Santos to burst forward in the knowledge that Zagallo would cover for him and that he would drift inside to create space, and he allowed Didi to move forward into the #10 role knowing that Zagallo would tuck inside to make sure they're compact and not outnumbered. He essentially played the role Giggs did in 06/07 - a playmaking inside forward who supported both the midfield and his left back. Vicente can't do that.

Perhaps I'm wrong but from what I remember Zito was a steely midfield general, a one-man midfield almost. Didi was essentially a #10 playing from deep and did very little defensive work. I suppose Modric's work-rate compensates for that.

I don't think you are giving enough credit to Didi and defensive work. Even with a great defensive midfielder like Zito behind you, you have to do your job defensively to make a 4-2-4/4-4-2 like that work. He did push forward when in possession but he was quick to recover his position and they had an impeccable defensive record with 0 conceded goals in the entire group stage and yet another clean sheet in the first phase of the knock-outs as well.

Like Joga says, Zagallo became more prominent as a defensive winger in 1962 while in 1958 he had great offensive contribution as well. Modric is alright to replicate Didi but Carrick is about as far off the mark as possible in comparison to Zito. Vicente is alright in the Zagallo role but I am also not too sure about that Lewa/Villa combination from up front.

 

[Kazi]

Wrt my choices for Pele and Zito, I'm mainly going off of what I saw in the semi final and final matches of the '58 World Cup, which was the bulk of my research. Pele was more of a forward than a playmaker, while Zito wasn't a rough, tough-tackling volante, but more of an organised, subtle one.

 

[Brwned]

Gerrard as Charlton is a huge turn-off for me. The gap in their football intellect and the selflessness, which is noted as one of the main qualities of 66's side in the OP, is the last word that I would chose to describe Steve Me, really.

I admire the dedication to the theme and to the idea of picking only English players though. But even from the English pool I would've picked Wilshere over Gerrard, despite him being an inferior player.

Gerrard in the biggest game of his career ended up playing at right back for the good of the team. He was certainly selfless when he needed to be.

As for Brwned team, Hargreaves is a weird choice for a destroyer. I read his explanation before, but still have my concerns. He doesn't have the tenacity nor sheer ruthlessness of Stiles (whom I really adore). Such a crucial yet overlooked part in the team. I don't see him as a man marker at all. Some further info will be appreciated.

Compared to Kazi it's a relatively easy temperature for Brwned excepting Charlton. Defensive line is nice! Can't fault Rio in Moore role, but Terry in Charlton role doesn't sit well. Still OK in general I suppose.

How would you describe Hargreaves and Jackie Charlton if not a typical destroyer and typical stopper?

RE: Hargreaves...

Absolutely. You only need to watch him as a 20 year old kid in the UCL final to recognise the similarities. Tenacity, aggression, speed and a knack for man-marking.

Hargreaves is having a blinder; crucial challenges, probing runs on the right and handy corners.

...

English clubs will be left asking one question after all this - how the hell did we miss this boy Hargreaves?

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2001/may/09/minutebyminute.sport

When he was suspended for the semi-final second leg against Real Madrid, Hargreaves stepped in and gave a performance of which the Bayern captain would have been proud.

Sven-Goran Eriksson, however, believes a full cap is not far away. "If he plays as he played when I saw him against Real Madrid, he will be picked for the senior side in the future," the England coach said of the player signed by Bayern from the Calgary Foothills, making his debut for the German club last August.

"I don't know if he always plays like that but it would be very good if he plays in the Champions League final."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...schamps-takes-aim-at-historic-cup-treble.html

With the single exception of Oliver Kahn, who saved three of the night's 17 penalties and made a wonderfully fearless snatch at the feet of the striker with five minutes of normal time remaining, Hargreaves earned the highest individual marks in yesterday's Italian sports papers. As the match went into extra-time he chased apparently lost causes and won the ball with notable tenacity, feeding his forwards with passes that often deserved a more positive response.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2001/may/25/championsleague.sport

...the coolest man on the field appeared to be the 20-year-old Owen Hargreaves, Bayern's Canadian-born England Under-21 international, who slotted into the central midfield alongside Effenberg and was showing signs, in both his defensive and creative work, of a talent that may be of use to Sven-Goran Eriksson's senior squad before long.

Hargreaves' close attention to the task of restricting the activities of Aimar was probably behind the replacement of the 21-year-old Argentine...

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2001/may/24/championsleague.sport

 

[Joga Bonito]

but Terry in Charlton role doesn't sit well.

Eh what's wrong with that. Both were classic archetypal stoppers imo. Can see what you are getting at with Hargreaves vs Stiles, given that the former was slightly less disciplined in his playing style - in the sense that he slightly veers more towards Gattuso rather than a Makelele. Well at least that's the impression I got from watching him at the WC 2006 and for United. Maybe he played a more disciplined holding job for Bayern in the early noughties as Brwned states.

I don't think you are giving enough credit to Didi and defensive work. Even with a great defensive midfielder like Zito behind you, you have to do your job defensively to make a 4-2-4/4-4-2 like that work.

Indeed, he himself said he doesn't like running about and doing the dirty work but he never quite struck me as lazy or someone who shirked away from his defensive duties. He was particularly astute with his defensive positioning and could certainly contribute to the midfield off the ball imo.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

I don't like Carrick much as Zito, as others have said too. There's something off there, I think. The more mature version of Carrick (which clearly has to be the one used here) isn't forceful enough to play that role, IMO.

The Zagallo thing has been covered, I think. I agree with the criticism there.

Don't love Hargreaves as Stiles, but I can see the logic behind it. Noble = Ball is another questionable choice - personally I think those boots are a bit too big for Noble to fill, but again I agree with much of the more specific reasoning behind it.

Stevie G as Charlton will probably divide opinions greatly. I don't think it's a bad choice myself, given the pool. Will be interesting to see if the latter can be replaced/upgraded at all if Brwned goes through - given the theme he has gone for.

The latter is a very nice touch, by the way, and adds plenty to the accomplishment, IMO. Not just because it's English players for an English team (that, in itself, would be more of a "cute" factor than anything - sticking to the orginal blueprint's nationality/ies was never a requirement here) but because it shows an understanding of what the '66 side was about: The "Englishness" of the system is something the manager has identified as important - and the drafting has been influenced by this. It makes sense, in short - and that should be praised.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Eh what's wrong with that. Both were classic archetypal stoppers imo.

Now that I'm sober...it's not a concern at all.

 

[Joga Bonito]

Now that I'm sober...it's not a concern at all.

 

[Pat_Mustard]

Now that I'm sober...it's not a concern at all.

 

[Ecstatic]

On second thoughts, I'm a little bit disappointed by the Brazilian team because I would have tried to introduce more Brazilian players like Robinho, Adriano, Emerson, Maxwell, Edmilson, Denilson, Roque Junior, Gilberto Silva, Luis Fabiano, Cris, Mancini, Juan...

I don't think it is necessary to have 11 English boys, 11 Brazilian boys or 11 former/current players of a specific club but my understanding of this draft is to recreate the same tactical system but above all a style of play/philosophy.

If I only focus on the modern Brazil team, we don't immediately guess the underlying @Joga Bonito philosophy given the fact there is only one Brazilian player (Marquinhos, not really an offensive RB by the way).

Sure, all the mentioned players are not suitable here but probably 1 or 2.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

See brwned picked up some last minute votes.

Hard luck Kazi!

 

[Kazi]

Congrats @Brwned

 

[Joga Bonito]

Great game. Congrats @Brwned , tough luck @Kazi

Btw regarding Stiles, how highly do you guys rate him? He does tend to be underrated imo but equally, I do acknowledge potential United bias in my appraisal of his standing. I guess it's harder to classify his standing given his position, but from what I've seen of him I have to say he's in the top tier when it comes to the art of holding the fort and being the enforcer in the engine room - alongside the likes of Varela, Desailly, Monti, Zito etc with Rijkaard being the clear stand-out.

He wasn't just a 'cog' as such for his sides but played a pivotal role for both England and United during the sixties and I'd actually go so far as to say he was England's most important player after Sir Bobby, Moore and Banks. Likewise for United after the holy trinity. It isn't just based on him nullifying Eusébio in the World Cup Semi Final and the European Cup Final - esp in the latter where it was more or less him using his physicality as opposed to the man-marking/covering masterclass in the WC. He just exuded that security and that ability to almost single-handedly hold a midfield, with his combination of steel, tenacity and impeccable reading of the game, whenever I watched him.

Admittedly, he did have a pretty short career for England for what it's worth but that hasn't exactly stopped the likes of Schuster, Netzer, Falcao etc being handed their fair dues has it? Well not exactly great examples as all of the above three were flair players and had some truly stand-out WC/Euros etc but likewise, you also can't downplay Stiles impact in the WC and EC wins imo.

He is also rated extremely highly and held in high regard by his peers and managers alike, which speaks volumes given that he was 'just' a midfield destroyer.

I soon came to love Nobby and that feeling has never lost its strength down the years. I make no apology for claiming that he was a great player. He had a reputation for being rough and tough, a kicker, but that assessment only ran along the surface of his ability. Nobby Stiles did things for United, and England, that no one else could have done. At United, as it would be with England, an entire team was in his debt. He would make his name marking Eusebio on behalf of England, but that was the most visible and obvious part of of his brilliance. There was so much else. In the dressing room, on the team bus or in a hotel, he could cause mayhem with his clumsiness, but on the field he saw every threat to our defense.

Nobby read the game as though he was equipped with radar, and if I will always feel the greatest pride that I played in the company of George and Denis, the same is equally true of Nobby Stiles. He was the often unsung fourth greatest player and for me it is one of the happiest facts of my career that he and I enjoyed so much success together and, as it happened, shared the achievement of being the only Englishmen to win both the European and World Cups. In many ways he was the forerunner of Roy Keane in that he was always at the heart of danger, sniffing out points of trouble like some relentless tracker dog. He was a dog of war, if you like, snapping and snarling at both his opponents and teammates. When we entered the most vital phase of our campaign to win the European Cup, for Busby and for our fallen teammates, Nobby was a giant in both his will and his understanding of what had to be done.

It was a vital point of the story that was beginning to unfold, and when we came to the detail and execution of it, the little man became a giant, unscrupulous at times no doubt, fiercely committed always, but also someone who loved the challenge of the game, and the feeling he got from being in a winning team. No one I would ever know in football was prepared to do so much for his teammates.

Where he differed somewhat from Roy Keane was that he didn't so much see himself as someone at the centre of the battle, with a duty to go forward and spread his influence all over the the field and into every corner of the team, but more as a troubleshooter, someone whose job was to clean up the difficulties, make it easier for people like George, Denis and me to operate at the top of our games.

Sometimes your heart would leap into your mouth as the opposition seized on a mistake and then, in a flash, there would be Nobby mopping up the danger, passing the ball on with a few choice remarks for the team-mate who had surrendered it. If he didn't shout at you, the expression on his face would be eloquent enough. It would say, 'OK you stupid bastards, I've done my job, now get on with yours.'

On occasions, when he made one of his more elaborate interventions, when he came out of nowhere to shut down danger, I would shake my head and think, 'How on earth did you figure that out?' It was a form of envy really. I knew that as long as I played, I wouldn't have that ability to seize on something so quickly and act so sharply - and ruthlessly if necessary. When Jimmy Murphy hammered out the need to win the tackle, to always be first, he might have had Nobby in mind. Nobby did the hardest thing in the game, he got you the ball, and, as Jimmy used to say, 'All the rest is bloody easy'.

More than anything Sir Bobby is in awe of his reading of the game and ability to 'put out fires', something which Sir Alex reiterates in the video below.

...Accompanied by the Nobby Stiles radar system, this Bill Foulkes was an immense asset...

...after Nobby had made one of his seek-and-destroy satellite runs...

 

[Joga Bonito]

George Cohen on his top 10 World Cup Moments (Nobby Stiles actually features twice)

6 - Nobby Stiles

Spoiler

Not many people know this, but we came very close to losing Nobby Stiles from the tournament in ’66 following some pressure from the FA.

In our final Group One match against France, a game we won 2-0 thanks to Roger Hunt’s goals, Nobby was quite fortunate not to be shown a red card following a high tackle on Jacques Simon.

The Frenchman had tried to sell Nobby a dummy on the halfway line, but that was something you just didn’t do. You didn’t sell Nobby anything! He caught his opponent with his boot and laid him completely out.

Naturally, he was quick to leave the scene of the crime – in fact he came and hid behind me. I turned and said, “What did he do to deserve that?”

“He called me Norbert,” replied Nobby.

“But that’s your name in French,” I said.

“Is it? So you speak French do you George? Well, when he wakes up tell him I’m very sorry!” That was Nobby to a tee.

The thing is he didn’t even get a yellow card from the referee, but the incident was picked up by a representative in the crowd. The FA were given the report and subsequently they asked Alf Ramsey if Stiles’ place in the team was necessary.

Now I don’t know what was said, but I can imagine Alf’s response (he reportedly said we don't play if Nobby doesn't play) and it’s fair to say that the FA got the message. Had Stiles been forced from the squad, then I think Alf would have probably followed. The rumour went that Alf put it down to Nobby having trouble with his contact lenses.

Had we lost Nobby, I think there’s a very strong possibility that we wouldn’t have gone on to lift the trophy – he was that important to the team. Against Portugal in the Semi Final, his performance was unbelievable.

He was vital to our success as a team, he was our destroyer. Nobby’s organisation was second-to-none, and while his game was very simple, it was very, very effective.

4 - Nobby Stiles versus Eusebio

Spoiler

It was Bobby Charlton’s goals that ultimately sent us through to the World Cup Final, but it was the performance of Nobby Stiles that was our foundation in the Semi-Final against Portugal.

Portugal were a terrific side and in the form of Eusebio they had one of the very best to have ever played the game. Going into the match, he’d scored seven goals in four games, so it was clear that he needed to be stopped.

Nobby was charged with the task of marking him and what transpired was one of the best individual World Cup performances – he was absolutely superb. Few could get near the mighty Eusebio, but that day, Nobby had him in his pocket.

I still think about that display from Nobby, even now some 48 years later because, quite simply, it was a faultless illustration of how to mark someone out of the game. It’s an often thankless role, but Nobby was a selfless player. Everything he did, he did for the team.

Without him, I’m not sure we would have got as far as we did. He had so much passion, and it was infectious – it rubbed off on all those that were around him. He kept things simple, he could pass, he moved well and could tackle as well as anyone.

Eusebio may have scored Portugal’s late penalty in their 2-1 defeat, but apart from that he didn’t get a sniff. He left the pitch in tears, but Nobby had that affect on people – Eusebio certainly wasn’t the first or the last.

It was just a fantastic performance, and one that probably doesn’t get the recognition that it deserves. As I have said, without Nobby, I’m not sure we would have done as well as we did.

I think he was a magnificent influence on the team.I think if you look at the best of the Manchester United team that didn’t have Nobby, there may have been something missing….I remember asking Alf Ramsey once, he said that his 1966 World Cup team had 5 world class players and Nobby was one of them

Nobby was a tigerish tackler, but I knew him well enough to know that he never deliberately hurt an opponent. Every team needed a hard-man ball-winner and Nobby fulfilled that role for us. They didn't come much smaller in stature or bigger in heart than Nobby. He was a bubbling, bouncing dynamo of footballing industry, permanently hungry for the ball, and took it as a personal affront that he might be denied of it. There was only ten stone of Nobby, but many opponents recoiled from engaging with him in the tackle as if they had been confronted by ten tons

George Best was probably the icing - but very good icing - on a cake made by Bobby Charlton and Nobby Stiles

 

[Chesterlestreet]

He wasn't just a 'cog' as such for his sides but played a pivotal role for both England and United during the sixties and I'd actually go so far as to say he was England's most important player after Sir Bobby, Moore and Banks. Likewise for United after the holy trinity. It isn't just based on him nullifying Eusébio in the World Cup Semi Final and the European Cup Final - esp in the latter where it was more or less him using his physicality as opposed to the man-marking/covering masterclass in the WC. He just exuded that security and that ability to almost single-handedly hold a midfield, with his combination of steel, tenacity and impeccable reading of the game, whenever I watched him.

He was clearly very important for those sides, and that says a great deal.

It doesn't say it all, though. He was much more limited on the ball than most of those other greats you mention above, which probably places him a step below them on the ladder. A player who excelled at putting out fires to the point of greatness, but not a player who actually transcended his (fairly basic, at the end of the day) role. That would be my take on him, and the latter shouldn't be taken as some sort of slight - it really isn't, as he was great at what he did.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

He was clearly very important for those sides, and that says a great deal.

It doesn't say it all, though. He was much more limited on the ball than most of those other greats you mention above, which probably places him a step below them on the ladder. A player who excelled at putting out fires to the point of greatness, but not a player who actually transcended his (fairly basic, at the end of the day) role. That would be my take on him, and the latter shouldn't be taken as some sort of slight - it really isn't, as he was great at what he did.

Monti, Varela and Zito played in different and more expensive systems. In modern formations, between likes of Makalele Desailly etc I don't count him as inferior in any way. As physical as Desailly and pivotal in keeping the ball ticking as Makalele plus added versatility to play as CB (for United). He fit in with Alf Ramsey workman like midfield tactics to perfection.

 

[harms]

Monti, Varela and Zito played in different and more expensive systems. In modern formations, between likes of Makalele Desailly etc I don't count him as inferior in any way. As physical as Desailly and pivotal in keeping the ball ticking as Makalele plus added versatility to play as CB (for United). He fit in with Alf Ramsey workman like midfield tactics to perfection.

Another one

 

[Joga Bonito]

He was clearly very important for those sides, and that says a great deal.

It doesn't say it all, though. He was much more limited on the ball than most of those other greats you mention above, which probably places him a step below them on the ladder. A player who excelled at putting out fires to the point of greatness, but not a player who actually transcended his (fairly basic, at the end of the day) role. That would be my take on him, and the latter shouldn't be taken as some sort of slight - it really isn't, as he was great at what he did.

I guess that's fair enough. As a package as a whole, he does tend to be lacking on the ball relatively and doesn't exactly transcend his role (which is what makes Rijkaard arguably the greatest DM ever, so to say), but when it comes to the primary facet/responsibility of being the 'holding midfielder' he's more or less up there with the best of em.

In modern formations, between likes of Makalele Desailly etc I don't count him as inferior in any way. As physical as Desailly and pivotal in keeping the ball ticking as Makalele plus added versatility to play as CB (for United). He fit in with Alf Ramsey workman like midfield tactics to perfection.

Indeed, and a top-notch man-marker to boot and he was certainly decent on the ball without necessarily being a noteworthy ball player.

Another one

 

[Gio]

He was clearly very important for those sides, and that says a great deal.

It doesn't say it all, though. He was much more limited on the ball than most of those other greats you mention above, which probably places him a step below them on the ladder. A player who excelled at putting out fires to the point of greatness, but not a player who actually transcended his (fairly basic, at the end of the day) role. That would be my take on him, and the latter shouldn't be taken as some sort of slight - it really isn't, as he was great at what he did.

I agree with this. @Joga Bonito My take is that he is, naturally, a little over-rated on here at times. His role was pivotal and that midfield spoiler role tends to be the most important job in the park. I wouldn't however say it was an exclusive role that only a few mastered. Many did and almost every team that won major continental or global honours had a Styles equivalent holding the forte. So I'd place him on that kind of level and below the top tier of all-round British and Irish central midfielders (Souness, Keane, Edwards, Mackay, Giles, Bremner, Robson) who were more influential in both phases of play. I appreciate some of those played slightly broader roles, but that is also a reflection of their more expansive abilities.

 

[Joga Bonito]

My take is that he is, naturally, a little over-rated on here at times

Interesting, always felt he was rather under-appreciated by the draft community relative to other destroyers, as there have been occasions where he goes unpicked entirely (two all time drafts if I remember correctly) but I do understand that he plays an unfashionable role, and a role which not every team tends to employ, so it's not outrageous as such. He does get his plaudits at times though - the British draft where he played a great role for EAP etc.

So I'd place him on that kind of level and below the top tier of all-round British and Irish central midfielders (Souness, Keane, Edwards, Mackay, Giles, Bremner, Robson) who were more influential in both phases of play. I appreciate some of those played slightly broader roles, but that is also a reflection of their more expansive abilities.

That's definitely reasonable and I'd say the same goes for the ball playing centrebacks/liberos as opposed to the stopper-ish breed of centre-backs - Figueroa/Passarella/Baresi/Scirea/Moore etc vs Thuram/Kohler/Desailly/Bergomi/Santamaria etc. The former category, just like the more expansive B2B midfielders, simply bring more to the table and as such deserve to be rated higher. I was just curious about his standing relative to the pure and classic holding midfielders such as Desailly, Deschamps, Varela, Monti, M.Silva, Makelele, L.Fernandez etc. Well some of em were clearly more than decent on the ball (Monti for instance) and it's difficult to categorise some of their roles (Monti once again) but as far as the holding midfielder category goes, how highly do you rate him relatively?

 

[Ecstatic]

@Kazi

Hope you're fine. You know much more Brazil 58 than me but what do you think of my understanding of your players?

I know all the best players are picked very early in the drafting process.

Ronaldo - version Inter Milan 97/98 (sure, David Villa makes sense)
Aguero & Vava - same height and profile maybe
Thiago Motta - Version Inter Milan 2009/12 - slow like Zito but very strong at his prime not to mention he is also a Brazilian citizen
Abidal / Nilton Santos - similar physical impact
Ramos - version Euro 2008 with Spain
Orlando - a stopper who has never scored a single goal for his club/country so many options

 

[Kazi]

@Kazi

Hope you're fine. You know much more Brazil 58 than me but what do you think of my understanding of your players?

I know all the best players are picked very early in the drafting process.

Ronaldo - version Inter Milan 97/98 (sure, David Villa makes sense)
Aguero & Vava - same height and profile maybe
Thiago Motta - Version Inter Milan 2009/12 - slow like Zito but very strong at his prime not to mention he is also a Brazilian citizen
Abidal / Nilton Santos - similar physical impact
Ramos - version Euro 2008 with Spain
Orlando - a stopper who has never scored a single goal for his club/country so many options

Ronaldo - I think you need someone more creative. Neymar is a better match IMO.
Aguero - Aguero probably had more to his game than Vava. Vava didn't make as many runs through in the inside forward positions like Aguero does, was a proper poacher.
Abidal - Probably need someone more attacking

The other three are fine. Ramos is perfect, he was my #1 choice for Djalma Santos.