Looking forward to itWell, I guess Fontaine plays one more game so we can discuss it further in the next game
Sheep draft QF - NM vs Cutch
- Thread starter Balu
- 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?
I was just surprised Gamarra is considered a 'weakness' and wanted to know more about him as I thought he was a capable defender.
If you don't have anything to contribute, feck off!
Tbh, I seem to have rated Gamarra much higher than many here. Interesting. What type of striker he does not fare well against?
He oozed class whenever I saw him for Paraguay in the late 1990s and early 2000s. He didn't have great pace which probably contributed to his more nomadic club career and, by compensating amply in other areas, it was no surprise he did so well at the international level for a usually compact Paraguay. The opposite of your typical challenge-now-and-think-later centre-half, he rarely got caught out. I'm sure @antohan or others could elaborate.
You just got it spot on, I'm not really sure why there were so many banging on about him being crap. He has been involved in drafts before and done decently, obviously not final level, but I would never have him down as a glaring weakness unless you play an insanely high defensive line.
It's one of those, eh? It takes 2-3 armchair fans to call them crap and not up to the mark and suddenly the guy's a liability. Bar Cannavaro in 2006, I can't think of any defender shining as brightly at a World Cup since his heroics in 1998.
Gamarra's average level is way overrated, his peak is greatly remembered and rightfully so. Having the chance to read up on him in the managers draft when I had Vanderlei Luxemburgo it was quite apparent that his level in international football was something he couldn't consistently keep up in club football except for sporadically. He changed clubs 9 times just between the age of 20-30 - no top club or anything near it except for a stint at Benfica/Atletico.
His three years at Inter was of typical Gamarra ilk as well after the 02 World Cup where he had a good start at the first season, still just playing 14 league games then mainly being on the bench the next two seasons just playing 13 league games over those two years.
Always had that great skill ceiling, but a very mediocre average level.
His three years at Inter was of typical Gamarra ilk as well after the 02 World Cup where he had a good start at the first season, still just playing 14 league games then mainly being on the bench the next two seasons just playing 13 league games over those two years.
Always had that great skill ceiling, but a very mediocre average level.
Did anyone say anything like that? I don't think he was criticised at all in Cutch's first game. And in what was pretty much a flawless team from the start, he was one of the less impressive players, so it made sense to upgrade him.
So you are pretty much judging a player on how many clubs he moved around + his form for Inter Milan when he was 30+? OK... Thanks for the expert opinion.
Gamarra didn't spend long at Internacional, but he is a legend there. He won the Bola de Prata every year while with them, and again when he returned to play for Corinthians. What you call his "great skill ceiling" was his average level for Paraguay, not just in France, but throughout the qualifiers (Paraguay were second only to Argentina, by a single point), and after when they kept a clean sheet throughout the group phase in the 1999 Copa América, only to draw 1-1 and go out on penalties against Uruguay. That was his peak, and a very impressive one indeed.
I've no idea why he didn't adapt well in Europe, a lot of great players don't, and with South Americans you also have to factor in the complex ownership structures and agents running their business for profit at the player's detriment. I was actually in Brazil when he moved to Flamengo, and that was no more than a stepping stone to another move. There's financial, tax and money laundering reasons to process transfers via what becomes effectively a club providing a "front" for a transfer. It happened all the time, South American agents made more money out of helping others launder money through transfers than through representing the players themselves. It has changed a fair bit since 9/11 obviously, but before there wasn't much by way of checks and it was pretty much the norm to see players bounce back and forth between European and South American clubs.
You didn't know that, of course, but feel free to pass judgement on football players for simply being pawns in a game played at a much larger scale.
South American club football is generally ignored or completely underrated round here. It's frequently used as some sort of ultima ratio against a player if he - for some reason or other, which may not even be football related - failed to make an impression in Europe.
The latter meaning - on top of everything else - that he failed to make an impression while playing for the small handful of clubs considered big enough to be worth playing for. It's a form of elitism which makes very little sense.
It was touched on regarding Hagi, by the way, earlier in this draft. Failed to properly impress at Barca/Real - but why? Because he wasn't all that good? Or because the system, the team mates, the club, the city, the country, the culture...or whatever factor it may be simply wasn't right for the man himself. Or for his wife? Who knows? There's a person involved as well as a footballer - which people seem to forget.
Anyway, I can only repeat what Gio said above: Whenever I saw Gamarra play, he was great. So calm it was scary - even against top notch opposition. His partner wasn't bad either. In fact, that whole Paraguay defence in the late 90s was pretty damn good.
The discussion is regarding whether or not Gamarra deserves to be played as one of the 8 central defenders in an all time draft. It is a level above his qualities, even at his peak, and he would easily be an odd man out compared to Baresi, Scirea, Kohler and so forth.
Bola de Prata means team of the season in the Brazilian league and for central defenders there is no competition at all so being included means absolutely nothing. Wes Brown would have 10 bola de Ouro's if he played 10 seasons in Brazil and that is no exaggeration either considering previously included CB's between 1990-00 are - Roque Junior, Cacapa, Djian, Ze Carlos, Galvao, Baiano etc etc.
The biggest name after Gamarra to win it that decade was Roque Junior and the rest are nearly unknowns. It is very easy to accept stuff like Bola de Prata's as proofs of brilliance, but then you have to accept that Mazinho won it as many times as Gamarra. Djalminho won the player of the year even - so did Carioca, Rocha or Amoroso as well which Gamarra never did.
Gamarra did great for Paraguay, for his own sake it is best to leave it there as at club level he wasn't nearly at the level of the best defenders in history.
Sure, a lot of random people win awards in Brazil, it is winning three out of three seasons that was emphasised, and his form for Internacional in particular. Of course, I doubt you ever watched Internacional play, or more than 90 minutes of Gamarra, but hey go ahead, knock him down alll you want based on armchair wiki research and spurious inferences. Anyone who watched him in 1996-1999 wouldn't suscribe to your mental theories of low average levels. What a load of codwallop... Classic case of coming up with a story that fits the data and completely ignoring reality.
I agree he isn't a top 8 all-time, obviously, the thing is he was being highlighted as a weakness when there were 32 defenders in this and the all-time pool had already been significantly reduced via blocks and the two latest criterions ruling out pre-90s players. Even then, not being top 8 doesn't make someone a liability. Underwhelming maybe, but the question is whether thay can or can't do the job.
If you have players who have done it against the best in both club and international football then obviously someone like Gamarra is going to stick out like a sore thumb. Yep he might have had a good high level in certain internationals etc but he doesn't deserve to be playing in these rounds to be brutally honest. Guys like Kohler and Baresi.. are playing in defence, Gamarra doesn't cut it here.
it is not a reflection on his ability but more about the extremely high standard of players we have at this stage.
Again, we were talking about him being pointed out as a liability in earlier rounds, not about whether he should be starting in a semi. Not that he would do a bad job on someone like Batistuta.
Adding to the 3 out of 3 Bolas de Prata, which apparently are a joke and not worth getting, he was also selected in the South American Best XI in 1995, 1996, 1998 and 2000 (South American Football Writers/Reporters vote for it).
"Low average level", what a pile of crap.
Gamarra never won it three times in a row though[you said 3/3 which is true], that is something you've made up to prove a point here and now. He was included as part of the best CB's with Andrei in 1995, Adilson 1996 and then in 1998 with Djian. Trying to argue that the trophy is some proofs for your thesis is just retarded. Mazinho did win it 4 times in a row however, in a much higher contested position yet that doesn't mean much for arguing that he's one of the best midfielders in history.
Last edited:
Definitely so.
I doubt Mazinho was selected in the South American XI in four out of 6 consecutive seasons, probably never made the cut at all. None of the flukey one-off Prata winners you list got a look in for that either.
I think the discussion has derailed totally.
The point was between me and Balu on whether 'Gamarra -> Nesta' or 'Fontaine -> van Basten' that would have made a bigger impact to Cutch's team as a 1st round reinforcement.
The point was between me and Balu on whether 'Gamarra -> Nesta' or 'Fontaine -> van Basten' that would have made a bigger impact to Cutch's team as a 1st round reinforcement.
Just thinking i missed a trick not having Zanetti stepping up to take the final penalty here, with the subplot in this one of playing against the manager i stole him from. Perhaps too cruel but no doubt someone like @antohan would have done it
Re: Gamarra. He was a 10th round pick that i knew few questions would be asked of to hopefully get me through through the first round. Was thinking of Gallas or Terry but either of them would have been the curse of death so went for the safe pick. Plan was always to upgrade right away before the company got too elite.
Re: Gamarra. He was a 10th round pick that i knew few questions would be asked of to hopefully get me through through the first round. Was thinking of Gallas or Terry but either of them would have been the curse of death so went for the safe pick. Plan was always to upgrade right away before the company got too elite.
Cutch would have lost if he had played Gamarra in this match, even if he had Van Basten up front. I am 100% sure of that.
Edgar's not going to let this go!Again, when did that happen? Certainly not in the one game Cutch played before replacing him and the discussion in this thread started, when EAP called Fontaine underwhelming while saying Gamarra could do a job against Puskas.
Pre/during reinforcement round.
Don't remember that either. I think you're a bit touchy regarding Gamarra here, no one called him crap or a glaring weakness like you said, let alone were many banging on about it at any point. Gamarra was always a decent pick in the drafts and I don't remember him ever being criticised heavily or anything like that. He could have easily played another game in most other teams, but Cutch's team was already so incredibly strong that he was replaced first (and with Nesta available, it was obvious that Cutch would go for him with his first pick). That's it and I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
You are forgetting I have my fingers in a lot of puddings, as kps would call it. A lot of the references were in convo, sajeev in particular when trying to establish if he would get MvB
What got me touchy wasn't the expectation he would be upgraded (of course he couldn't turn down Nesta) but Annah's nonsense about low average levels, which was purely based on spurious inferences.
The funny thing is he keeps at it despite Cutch once again deciding to stick with Fontaine. It is clear as day he ain't dropping him for the sake of scanvotes, good on him.
Tbh, I just replied twice to Balu...and that was early in the discussion.
Wait, so your rant is mostly based on one (or maybe a few) nervous draft managers, who tried to convince themselves that they'll get their perfect pick and wrote therefore a bit exaggerated stuff in private conversations about players in other teams. Fair enough then.You are forgetting I have my fingers in a lot of puddings, as kps would call it. A lot of the references were in convo, sajeev in particular when trying to establish if he would get MvB
What got me touchy wasn't the expectation he would be upgraded (of course he couldn't turn down Nesta) but Annah's nonsense about low average levels, which was purely based on spurious inferences.
Oh and you posted the following before Annah got involved, so don't blame your touchiness on him
.On a sidenote, writing MvB confuses the shit out of me. Everyone used it for Mark van Bommel on Bayern boards during his time with us and now everytime someone uses it for van Basten, I'm like "what the feck, makes no sense"
.I was following Gio's cue, certainly not ranting about it (yet).Wait, so your rant is mostly based on one (or maybe a few) nervous draft managers, who tried to convince themselves that they'll get their perfect pick and wrote therefore a bit exaggerated stuff in private conversations about players in other teams. Fair enough then.
Oh and you posted the following before Annah got involved, so don't blame your touchiness on him
On a sidenote, writing MvB confuses the shit out of me. Everyone used it for Mark van Bommel on Bayern boards during his time with us and now everytime someone uses it for van Basten, I'm like "what the feck, makes no sense"