Pretty much my thoughts as well. Gone for Tuppet
Surveillance Draft R1: P-Nut vs Tuppet
- Thread starter Physiocrat
- Start date
Don't remember the exact figures, but
After 8 hours (effectively done at start and managers notified)
Step 1) Team A has 40 injury tickets, 10 have a player's name next to them, the other 30 are blank.
Step 2) Randomise. If the top of the list is a number assigned to a player he gets injured
Step 3) Repeat 1 and 2 for Team B
After 16 hours
Step 4) Repeat 1-3
So up to 4 players can get injured (2 per team) while even odds is only one will.
I had bought into @P-Nut0712 tactics in this particular game. The back three could have done with better fits, but I though @Tuppet had a major clusterfeck with Zidane, Diego and Zlatan playing into the hands of a robust spine.
The only issue in the back of my mind was Lucho, one of my favourite players ever. I could see him destroying Garay and, particularly, stealing in like a ghost to twat the ball with a fantastic header from the crosses the clusterfeckers would surely provide.
The injuries flip it. He is now easily man of the match here.
The only issue in the back of my mind was Lucho, one of my favourite players ever. I could see him destroying Garay and, particularly, stealing in like a ghost to twat the ball with a fantastic header from the crosses the clusterfeckers would surely provide.
The injuries flip it. He is now easily man of the match here.
You'd be in the minority here to take Vieira over Schweinsteiger. And there's a good reason for that.
Sure, opinions differ. As good a reason as any.
Yeh. Judging by that "Overrated players" thread, you're right. I don't say your view about Schweinsteiger vs Vieira is wrong though. Like you said, there's not much different between them.
Both superb players in their primes. What I think Vieira had over Schweinsteiger was his ability to quickly transform defense into attack -- he carried the ball forward better, I guess. On the flip side, you have to say that Bastian had one of the best engines in the game, worked relentlessly, and I think his play-making from deep was a cut above anything Vieira was capable of (always thought BFS was similar to Keane in that respect -- the metronomic passing, not quite Xavi levels, but not a million miles away).
You can make cases for both of them, I think, but it always comes down to which style you prefer, or which style you think will be more effective in a given game.
The difference is massive IMO.
Schweini is far more complete and could perform at World Class levels deployed in different midfield roles, in different tactical setups.
Vieira was a more athletic/physically imposing box to box midfielder.
Shocked that so many people rate schweinsteiger above Vieira. Literally doesn't come close for me
Agreed that I also rate Schweini better than Vieira. But it's not THAT "massive". I think both can play in counter attacking team, and also in tiki-taka. Vieira's passing is very good. His route one pass to Henry was a beauty.
60 mins- No injuries but P-Nut Tactics Change
60 mins.
No injuries but P-Nut goes in search of a winner in the last 30 mins
No injuries but P-Nut goes in search of a winner in the last 30 mins
Schweiny was instrumental to their WC campaign, while I wouldn't call Vieira a key player for them. That final performance too
The only clear edge that Vieira has on Schweiny is his physicality, but the latter is, imo, more intelligent, better passer and a more all-rounded player, excelling at many different positions. Although I tend to underrate Vieira
Finally Puyol is on the left! Now it looks like something that resembles an actual backline
I see.. Hmm not sure if the way I numbered my players was smart in hindsight but oh well.
Vieira is severely underrated on this forum generally and it stems in here as well. The man matched Roy Keane toe to toe and got the better of him plenty of times, was an absolutely vital cog of a team that went unbeaten for a season in a quality premier league and was again instrumental for France when they reached the WC final - destroyed Xavi, Alonso and Fabregas pretty much single handedly. He's one of the great midfield generals of a generation of great midfield generals and possibly possesses the best technique out of the usual suspects including Keano. Sure Bastian is a great CM as well and a lot different from Vieira but comments like he's a level or two above the Frenchman reek of forgetfulness. In a 1v1 I'd back him up against Bastian, without doubt. Bastian is more versatile, tactically flexible and can connect different sorts of teammates together well but in a 1v1 anyone, not just him, will need something special to trounce Patrick, as Roy Keane often found out.
That's largely what I said and find to be a massive difference (great? hugely relevant? whatever). At B2B they are evenly matched but Bastian can excel at other midfield roles and tactical setups.
Essentially, if I were to build a team from scratch and had a choice of Schweini or Vieira I would pick Bastian every day. No underrating of Vieira, just the common sense of one being a more complete all-round package.
Who would prevail in an actual game, both in appropriate setups, etc? It's a toss up. Like with Keane, it would be a great battle and some will be won and others lost.
PS: But then, you always underrated Bastian. I remember you telling me I should have picked Bale and not him as an 80s player in the decades draft. Something about him being out of his depth in an all-time context (while Bale wasn't, somehow, 2-3 years ago to boot).
Last edited:
There's no way the difference is massive, except in someone's very subjective opinion. I can see someone favoring either player, but to claim the difference is enormous is actually slightly insane. Both were at a very similar level, whichever you take is a matter of pure preference.
In the context of this game, by the way, Vieira and Keane would absolutely dominate Schweinsteiger and Ince. It's a harsh result when you consider that one team quite clearly dominates the middle of the park.
For Christ sake, reading comprehension classes pronto.
For you, or me? Your post doesn't clarify.
Not that I don't agree - he was instrumental, but the bolded is a bit of a stretch. He had Makelele next to him in that run who also had a pretty good tournament.
I prefer Keane over Vieira, being as objective as possible but there is not much between them. Schweini is somewhere there as well same class as the former two. Probably I'd have Keane, then Schweini/Vieira in that order. Can't make up my mind who of he latter two is better - it's a question more about formation and tactics rather than individuality.
Evenly matched 1v1, the massive difference being Schweini can excel in different midfield roles. Won't make a difference to relative performance in a given game, makes a difference to their relative standing as footballers.
I agree. Patrick played with a DM (Petit, Gilberto, Makélélé) next to him for most of his career, which is what you'd need usually. Though I'd say even bastian is at his best next to a DM like he was during the treble winning season. You can play him as the DM and he can do a defensive job like he did in the WC final but his ideal role is a proper B2B.
Indeed, which is why comments like Bastian being a huge deal better than Vieira don't sit right with me.
Not sure if it was Bale but I did myself pick Alonso ahead of Bastian for that 80s spot in the same round you picked him after me if I remember, but again Alonso is also very underrated on here. Anyway that was a long time back and he's added tons to his CV since then, the fact that I'm rating him next to Keane and Vieira should be enough to say that I'm not underrating him.
I'm talking particularly about the Spain game. Claude was great in the tournament of course but Patrick was on steroids in that game. Unreal show of midfield dominance.
I'd say so myself, although we both should agree there's a bit of United in there. But still, the initial point was Bastian >>>> Vieira which is bollocks.
I agree with you here, and I'd also add that Schweinsteiger is far better in a number of areas -- he can create from deep, whereas Vieira could do that, but always with powerful runs which transformed defense into attack. Schweinsteiger was able to run games with his passing. Very simple one touch passing, but he set the tone of the game from a deep position -- and you're right, he is more flexible and tactically astute.
The point I'm making here, though, is that if you place Vieira in his favored CM role, the role in which he was one of the best of his generation, then he will dominate most matches -- especially if he has a beast like Keane playing next to him. I just see that partnership as being above and beyond anything Ince and Schweinsteiger can replicate.
So, if you mean that Schweinsteiger is the better player overall because of his versatility, then I can genuinely understand your point. I might even be tempted to agree with you. But, I just can't fathom blanket statements implying that Schweinsteiger was a level above Vieira in every aspect (i.e., put Schweinsteiger in the Vieira role and he'll do just as well -- he wouldn't, imo). However, Vieira isn't capable of playing a number of positions that Schweinsteiger played to a high level. So it's an argument with more than one set of criteria to it.
Maybe I did misunderstand your initial point, though.
Yeah this is a fair summary. I think Schweinsteiger merits consideration in that group, especially after 2014, but there's not a lot between any of the three of them. And ultimately it's more about fit and the job in hand that decides who is the best man for the job.
I don't think this one would be close. For large periods of the game, P-Nut has lined up with 3 at the back and only inside forwards or very advanced wingers in his wide positions.
Carragher, Garay and Puyol are so far away from the defenders I would pick to try and cope with this it's laughable. Forlan, Panucci, Arce, Leonardo and especially, especially Enrique would have an absolute field day.
It's a shame because the central spine of his side is superb, but can't possibly hope to score as many goals against Tuppets strong defence as they will concede.
Tuppet to win 4 or even 5 - 2
Carragher, Garay and Puyol are so far away from the defenders I would pick to try and cope with this it's laughable. Forlan, Panucci, Arce, Leonardo and especially, especially Enrique would have an absolute field day.
It's a shame because the central spine of his side is superb, but can't possibly hope to score as many goals against Tuppets strong defence as they will concede.
Tuppet to win 4 or even 5 - 2
Agreed with the notion both operate better with a DM next to them, whereas with Keano.. I'd argue he is in less need of a DM next to him, although in Europe against the very best he did need Butt next to him for that extra reinforcement. Whereas I felt with Schweini for regular games week in week out, he'd need a DM but in one off games he could play as a DM.
In terms of controlling a game through passing ability, I'd rate Schweini higher than both Keano and Viera as he has that level of silk, closer to the likes of Modric/Scholes but not quite as good a technician but his on the ball skills, in terms of footwork was top tier and his range of passing, superior. He didn't need to rely on his athleticism to beat a man, he used more guile and intelligence.. whereas Viera who also had deft footwork, relied more on his athleticism. Keane in terms of footwork, less gifted than either but he had an aura on the ball and a conviction in possession which the other two don't quite match. Keane was a very intense player in possession, rather like Davids.. where no moment on the ball is wasted, the other two slightly more lacksadaisical on the ball which gives the impression that they have more time on the ball.
Off the ball, Keano has the best aggression, can really grab a game by the scruff of the neck.. Viera has it too, but against top top opponents, I'd rather have a Keano as he is fearless against anyone whereas Viera had a ceiling for me. Schweini less aggressive but a more clever footballer positionally.. the fact he is less dynamic than the other two, makes him look weaker than them two but he read the game extremely well.
I'd definitely rate Keano as better than Viera, but Schweini is more a game controller rather than a just pure B2B midfielder at his best. Not sure where he is in relation to them two, but I don't see him as the type of guy who'd be overwhelmed by them.. he has alot of confidence on the ball and even if he is pressed hard, kicked around.. he has the tenacity and strength of will to handle it. On the other hand, in terms of his defensive work.. I can't see him being able to keep a rampaging Viera on a leash.. physically in that respect, he'd struggle imo.
I know I'm being a bit anal and it's become a bit of a hobby-horse, but I'm never really a fan of a forward arrow on Rui Costa. He wasn't the Kaka or Litmanen type who drove into boxes and plundered goals. At Milan he scored four goals in five seasons - he was all about setting up others as his partnership with Batigol at Fiorentina testified.
This is the key distinction for me.
Almost a Scholes-Keane hybrid of sorts for me.. which is why I agree with @antohan he is easier to build a team around.
I'd agree with that. Far easier to build a team around, because at his best he could orchestrate everything in front of him. To be fair, Keane had this in his locker too, but not at the same level as his game was more adapted to a classic box to box role in a two man midfield.
The statement I replied to said there was not much different between them. Not difference in a given role, but "not much different". Point was there's a lot.
- B2B in a 4-4-2 I'd favour Vieira
- B2B in a classic continental midfield (DM+B2B+creative PM) I'd favour Schweini
- Holding DM - Schweini, Vieira was never a sitting DM
- Playmaking - Schweini again, not Vieira's strong suit
- Outside CM in a diamond - Schweini, he can push to the flank effectively and has his origins as a RW to draw upon
- Tiki taka - Schweini, it isn't just being able to pass a ball, it's not just discipline required but a state of mind and Vieira's instincts would betray him
Very much. When trying to recreate a 4-4-1-1 like ours (and hopefully improve it) I knew I couldn't get Scholes and someone like Modric would not reach Scholes highs (or keep his bottom level) while retaining the gung-ho flaws.
I thought with Nedved ahead I needed less Scholes and more Keane for a more controlling midfield. Nedved-Schweini-Essien would have been phenomenal and as solid as you can get without making the sacrifices of sticking a pure DM (which would run counter to the spirit of that side).
Aye, this lack of defensive width was the key for my vote.
I think he already has. He just put in a masterclass last weekend in the Classico and has been pivotal for Madrid over the last few years winning two CLs in three years.
In my opinion he's the best CM of this decade (2010 onwards).
Watched the same game but would never consider it a master class. Thought it was a poor game from both sides with no stand out performances from either side. Don't think Modric and Madrid had a single clear goal scoring chance in the game.
Modric was on another level from anyone else on the field though, especially in the first half. He was seeing everything 2-3 steps ahead. He's obviously given way better performances, sure.
He is indeed, and that's why I made the caveat it may not be the highs but the bottom level. In any case, the point stands as Modric has accomplished all that in a different setup, not a 4-4-2.
Lovely to see Keano with goals getting some love
Not that again