@VivaJanuzaj I don't think anyone is claiming that Batistuta wouldn't be a dangerous striker in your set-up. It's just that you 1. don't make full use of his abilities by playing him as a lone striker and 2. for what is required here, Crespo is just as good (in my opinion). I get that Batistuta is a vote winner, but I still don't think he's individually good enough going forward to use a pick on him when you already had an excellent fit for your team. But maybe that upgrade actually was the difference between going out and going through in this game, so who knows.
Sheep Draft Q/F - Sajeev vs VivaJanuzaj
- Thread starter Skizzo
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
VivaJanuzaj
Full Member
Not that it proves anything, but looking at Batistuta's goals shows you how little he needed to make a goal of something. Now picture this:
1. Breitner with a long ball to Batistuta*:
2. Figo/Nedved with an early cross to Batistuta:
3. Batistuta gets the ball a bit deep when on the counter:
*This is against Parma with Thuram and Cannavaro in it.
What more does a guy have to do to be a good lone striker? I mean he had it all - long shots, strength and aerial abilities, movement in the box, knew to drift wide(Which can be used by Figo/Nedved/Scholes to move inside). I'd fancy most strikers to be better in a two men striking pair because you got a second attacker taking away CBs, but does it mean he's any less good without that? I think not. I personally would never criticize anyone playing Batistuta as the lone striker up front.
@Balu , I'm not trying to sound defensive and I appreciate the comments from both you and @antohan , and it's better to hear it now than in the next match, but I reckon he'll really thrive in this setup even as when it's not the same setup he played in his career. Maybe for some of you he might not be a great upgrade for Crespo, but for someone who grew up with both of them at their peak, I always thought of Batistuta as a GOAT-ish striker and I don't think he'll have difficulties against any defender with proper distribution.
1. Breitner with a long ball to Batistuta*:
2. Figo/Nedved with an early cross to Batistuta:
3. Batistuta gets the ball a bit deep when on the counter:
*This is against Parma with Thuram and Cannavaro in it.
What more does a guy have to do to be a good lone striker? I mean he had it all - long shots, strength and aerial abilities, movement in the box, knew to drift wide(Which can be used by Figo/Nedved/Scholes to move inside). I'd fancy most strikers to be better in a two men striking pair because you got a second attacker taking away CBs, but does it mean he's any less good without that? I think not. I personally would never criticize anyone playing Batistuta as the lone striker up front.
@Balu , I'm not trying to sound defensive and I appreciate the comments from both you and @antohan , and it's better to hear it now than in the next match, but I reckon he'll really thrive in this setup even as when it's not the same setup he played in his career. Maybe for some of you he might not be a great upgrade for Crespo, but for someone who grew up with both of them at their peak, I always thought of Batistuta as a GOAT-ish striker and I don't think he'll have difficulties against any defender with proper distribution.
Raees
Pythagoras in Boots
- Joined
- May 16, 2009
- Messages
- 29,470
The draft world would be a worse place without Anto... love him or hate him, he is an integral part of draft folklore and he definitely brings the spectacle to what could be quite boring proceedings. Asking him to tone it down? be careful what you wish for.
I for one never rated Crespo as highly as some on here. He was a class striker, but Batigol was another level. I understand Batistuta is overrated in some respects especially as he didn't quite light up the international stage (56 goals in 78 appearances isn't to be sniffed at however) but how many teams did he play in where he was surrounded by top class width and creativity? creativity.. yes he had some quality play-makers, but he never really had wingers playing in his sides and yet he was such a force .. single-handedly he could put fear into the opposition. A constant menace.. his goal record is superior too and he played in inferior sides than Crespo. The only thing I dislike about Batistuta was he was inconsistent in a technical sense, one minute he can look so technically accomplished and another moment he looks like Andy Carroll.. but it sort of added to his mystique and unpredictability, defenders never felt comfortable around him. Van Basten for instance is a tier above quite easily.. he has the trophies as well as the all round brilliance/intelligence in his game to set himself apart from a Batistuta.
I for one never rated Crespo as highly as some on here. He was a class striker, but Batigol was another level. I understand Batistuta is overrated in some respects especially as he didn't quite light up the international stage (56 goals in 78 appearances isn't to be sniffed at however) but how many teams did he play in where he was surrounded by top class width and creativity? creativity.. yes he had some quality play-makers, but he never really had wingers playing in his sides and yet he was such a force .. single-handedly he could put fear into the opposition. A constant menace.. his goal record is superior too and he played in inferior sides than Crespo. The only thing I dislike about Batistuta was he was inconsistent in a technical sense, one minute he can look so technically accomplished and another moment he looks like Andy Carroll.. but it sort of added to his mystique and unpredictability, defenders never felt comfortable around him. Van Basten for instance is a tier above quite easily.. he has the trophies as well as the all round brilliance/intelligence in his game to set himself apart from a Batistuta.
antohan
gets aroused by tagline boobs
Late Parma/early Lazio and turn of the millenium Argentina. They weren't lone striker setups but he was the "referencia de área" in a way Bati rarely was except maybe at Roma when it suited him better to the aging legs.Which seasons in particular did Crespo impress as a line front man? I can't seem to remember and need to refresh my memory!
I agree with @Balu the only real upgrade here was in pulling power (even told off VJ when he picked him, not knowing the draw yet).
VivaJanuzaj
Full Member
True, yet I feel you guys don't give Batigol enough credit.I agree with @Balu the only real upgrade here was in pulling power (even told off VJ when he picked him, not knowing the draw yet).
Are you really happy to play him all the way to the final, even if van Basten, Müller or Puskas become available? If you replaced Dunga with Vieira or Schweinsteiger, your midfield would be set all the way for example and you could have gone for van Basten now. I get that you rate Batistuta higher than Crespo, it just feels like a temporary upgrade to fix something that wasn't broken in the first place. But if he's a favourite of yours and you're happy to keep him all the way, then my comments probably sound a bit harsh.True, yet I feel you guys don't give Batigol enough credit.
VivaJanuzaj
Full Member
We'll have to wait and see whose available and whose not.Are you really happy to play him all the way to the final, even if van Basten, Müller or Puskas become available? If you replaced Dunga with Vieira or Schweinsteiger, your midfield would be set all the way for example and you could have gone for van Basten now. I get that you rate Batistuta higher than Crespo, it just feels like a temporary upgrade to fix something that wasn't broken in the first place. But if he's a favourite of yours and you're happy to keep him all the way, then my comments probably sound a bit harsh.
Gio
★★★★★★★★
Crespo's reputation suffers a little due to doing most of his good work in Serie A and less of it in front of British audiences. Whereas Batigol did the business in Serie A and spectacularly tore up English defences in the Champions League (the goals against Man Utd and Arsenal in particular). He also benefited from top billing in three World Cups, while Crespo just got 2006 and had to (wrongly) play second fiddle in 2002 when he was it his peak. I don't think there's much in it and a lot depends on how they fit into the players around them.Late Parma/early Lazio and turn of the millenium Argentina. They weren't lone striker setups but he was the "referencia de área" in a way Bati rarely was except maybe at Roma when it suited him better to the aging legs.
I agree with @Balu the only real upgrade here was in pulling power (even told off VJ when he picked him, not knowing the draw yet).
antohan
gets aroused by tagline boobs
As @Balu said (and you could tell from my immediate reaction at the time), you fixed something that wasn't broken, but it may well have won you the game.True, yet I feel you guys don't give Batigol enough credit.
I do have a lot of time for Batistuta, but rate Crespo higher as the pure striker "reference in the box" (same goes for the unpicked RvN). @Raees makes a good point about how he could switch from sublime to donkey in no time, which is very much what is at the root of it all. Crespo's technique was superior, which made him more resourceful in resolving the various situations which arise in tight spaces. Batistuta was a lot more limited in that regard, and it showed, particularly when under pressure.
Watch any top 20/50 Bati or Crespo goals and you will see the difference, Bati had an insane long range shot and was a real warrior, a very determined and strong-willed player, which made him ideal for a "lesser team" and counterattacking setups. You couldn't leave him in space or he would hurt you, but give him no space and he suddenly wasn't half as dangerous.
Argies found that out themselves witnessing how the most unbeatable they looked in the 90s/00s was with Crespo, and not Batistuta. The better and more superior they were as a team, the more Crespo proved to be a better finishing touch.
With the team/setup you have, I'd argue Crespo was always the better fit.
Edgar Allan Pillow
Ero-Sennin
@antohan still the fact is that Batigol had a better career and scored more goals than Crespo. I like Crespo and maybe he's more deadly in the box that Batigol, but I think Batigol had more to his game than Crespo.
antohan
gets aroused by tagline boobs
He did have a better career and sustained good form for longer. Crespo's 98-01 peak is as good as anything Batistuta ever produced though and Argentina circa 2000 with Crespo instead of Batistuta was the best Argentina since... feck knows... it was far more entertaining than the '86/'78 vintage.@antohan still the fact is that Batigol had a better career and scored more goals than Crespo. I like Crespo and maybe he's more deadly in the box that Batigol, but I think Batigol had more to his game than Crespo.
VivaJanuzaj
Full Member
Yeah that might be fair, but against your team I was setup as a counterattacking side so I guess that fits.Bati had an insane long range shot and was a real warrior, a very determined and strong-willed player, which made him ideal for a "lesser team" and counterattacking setups. You couldn't leave him in space or he would hurt you, but give him no space and he suddenly wasn't half as dangerous.
antohan
gets aroused by tagline boobs
You can't set up to counter a team that isn't going all out to get you. I saw you posted some fantasy thing of where players would supposedly be, bore no resemblance to reality. Yours was a clear as day gung ho side, all the way to Dunga being its "DM".Yeah that might be fair, but against your team I was setup as a counterattacking side so I guess that fits.
VivaJanuzaj
Full Member
Maybe we just have different views on tactics(and maybe you're right and I'm wrong) but I don't see any problem playing counter attack against a team like Sajeev's. I don't see it as a pure counter attack because as you know football often changes throughout the match and I'll have the possession at times but I can see my team sitting deep sending Batistuta Nedved and Figo on the counter doing massive damageYou can't set up to counter a team that isn't going all out to get you. I saw you posted some fantasy thing of where players would supposedly be, bore no resemblance to reality. Yours was a clear as day gung ho side, all the way to Dunga being its "DM".