The 442 Draft - QF - Sjor/GSTQ vs Isotope/Himannv

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Team Sjor/GSTQ

Tactics

Counter-attacking
442 itself is a more direct setup then some others so naturally counter-attacking style is often a chosen style. The whole drafting process was built around that idea:

Defending
Without a good defence the whole system goes to shit so we drafted 4 defenders first combined with a great on goal that suits the centerback partnership. Vogts is one of the rare balanced fullbacks that is actually an elite defender, former part was crucial as we didnt really want a defensive fullback so we can fully exploit the offensive benefits of a double wing. On the other side a more attacking Cabrini who was still a fine defender and between them the best CB partnership in the draft, classic sweeper stopper combo of Rio Ferdinand and Fabio Cannavaro. Van der Sar behind them, obviously proven partnership with Rio and a great fit for the whole defence considering his unmatched organizational skills and communication which are key in situations where you invite pressure.
If there was ever doubt, think modern game proved it once again that a good defence means feck all unless every player on the team puts in work, the good old "attacker is your first defender, goalie is your first attacker" so the rest of the team was built like that as well. Two hard working wingers in Conti and Boniek, Davids as elite defensive midfielder in the engine room next to Paul Scholes, forever underrated maestro in drafts, specially in terms of his defensive game. Guy that played his whole career in the midfield two, on an insanely high level but always gets questioned in drafts for his defensive game while some who excelled in mid threes are louded to heavens, if this isnt the draft he will get the credit he deserves then it really is a draft suicide to have him in the team.
Up front hardworking Gigi Riva and his national partner Sandro Mazzola. Ten hardworking, defensively sound players with that defence, good luck scoring against this team.

Attacking
Team is filled with brilliant footballers so if there is a need to mix it up and play, they are more then capable which is always very important. But primarily the team is built to dominate on the counter. From great distribution of the goalkeeper all the way to a bulldozing power of Gigi Riva. There are so many different avenues for this team to counter that we dont really know where to start. The counter-attacking potential of Boniek and Conti with Scholes pinging passes right, left and center is plain scary.
Scholes will play his DLP role, which gives Davids the freedom to do his thing, cause havoc both on and off the ball. Good partner for Boniek as well as he can cover out wide in both phases of play when needed.

Factor X
Full hardworking unit with a GOAT stacked defence that perfectly fits with each other. Counter attacking potential with Scholes, Boniek and Conti.
Neither, its a lovely partnership of Sandro Mazzola and Gigi Riva that lead Italy to Euro and almost to WC 2 years later.

Team Isotope/Himannv

Tactics
High line, high press

1. High defensive line - Used to reduce space for the opposition to operate in and as such make it easier to press.
2. High press - Everyone contributes off the ball, including the front two.
3. Counter attacking - The tactic operates off the theory that a team is in its most vulnerable state as soon as it loses possession.
4. Hunting in packs - Attack the ball carrier aggressively with everyone in the vicinity and the others cut out all immediate passing lanes.

Team features:
Players, from attack to defence, with proven ability to play in multiple positions to add dimensions to team's dynamic.

1. Significant advantage at set pieces with many aerially dominant players: Passarella, Desailly, Ruggeri, Kempes, Keegan, and Bossis.
2. Relentless forward lines of two times Kevin Keegan and one time Mario Kempes Ballon d’Or winners. Both are physical and technical to play off each other. Great movement of Keegan will create space for Kempes’ surging run into the penalty box. Both are direct, powerful in the air and superb finishers. They're both also adept on dropping deeper or pulling wide to combine with midfield.
3. Solid as steel and pressing machine three-lung midfielders. Tricky and creative wingers Nedved and Littbarski are both hard working off the ball and contribute both wider and centrally. Tigana and Desailly in midfield who will run all day, providing safety base and ball supply support.
4. Good passer fullbacks in Lahm and Bossis who are both defensively excellent with good defensive workrate. Both are also as good as any for attacking options to provide width.
5. Argentinian CBs who know each other well and are both as tough as they come. There is top tier quality on the ball from Passerella in particular if we need to play it out. With Desailly as DM who can drop back or Bossis who can tuck in as CB, this setup brings the best of Passarella to contribute offensively when needed.
6. Lev Yashin the best keeper of all time and well suited to a high line.

Everyone contributes in defensive workrate with the aim of winning the ball back as soon as possible and when attacking, this team is incisive and deadly.


Key player:

Daniel Passarella


General compilation of Espana 82.

• Aggressive and reads the game well in equal measure
• Incredible leap on him with some of those headers
• Electric pace
• Well timed tackles
• Rocket of a shot on him
• Fantastic delivery on set pieces

vs Holland

• Some misplaced passes here but really shows off his passing range and vision in this one with his wand of a left foot.
• Excellent in the air
• Strong in the tackle and times them well
• Perfect positioning and reading of the game
• Lovely technique and close control in tight spaces

FAQs:

Why highlight Passarella?
He's in the perfect situation to deal some serious damage. Desailly in front of him and Bossis and Ruggeri flanking him gives him ideal cover to foray into midfield whenever the option arises. Tigana is an option for him to play off. Keegan and Kempes (who he obviously knows well) are excellent at receiving long passes and running the channels to give him options. The flanks are also full of players he can pick out if he wants to switch the play or kick off an attack on the flanks.

What makes this team special?
The workrate of all the players involved. All of them are suited to off the ball work and pressing together. They were selected with that tactic in mind and the pairings were made with some thought as well of how this team would function as a single unit.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

@Isotope @Himannv , your picture is too huge, if its not too much trouble, please create a normal sized one so they can be placed side by side.

Good luck!

@Šjor Bepo

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

I think off the bat, both teams are quite stacked everywhere, great complimentary personnel in defense, hard working solid two way wingers, very 4-4-2-esque front 2 and a much needed dynamic B2B player in Davids/Tigana. And of course both are playing counter attacking football.

The starkest difference in both teams is the 2nd midfielder - Scholes and Desailly.

In our eyes, this is our biggest advantage going into this game for multiple reasons.

1. In a game where two stacked opponents are both looking to play on the counter with excellent defensive setups, you need that extra bit of creativity from the midfield. Someone like Scholes can open up the game with a single long range pass which we have seen him do time and again, especially with the likes of Boniek/Riva/Mazzola who played all their careers gulping up long passes on the counter from creative midfielders like Platini/Suarez (More on Scholes in a post authored by Sjor Bepo)
2. Our opponent's central creative outlets are rather unimpressive. Dont mind not having a playmaker in central midfield but then the ideal thing to have would be a highly creative second striker. For example, Arsenal's Invincibles had Vieira/Silva in the central midfield but then Bergkamp was pulling the strings centrally dropping deep. Now Keegan was a really great player but he wasn't exactly the creative AM cum support striker type like Bergkamp. Of course Nedved and Littbarski offer a lot of creativity but considering how well both teams are stacked off the ball even on the flanks, the lack of a central creative outlet will be an Achilles heel.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

PAUL SCHOLES - THE GREATEST 4-4-2 PLAYER OF ALL TIME?

Lets talk about Scholes baby, lets talk about you and me.....
.....anyways. Considering we willingly committed a draft suicide by picking him, its a good time to again ask the interesting question, whats wrong with him(no toes jokes)?
Outside of games everyone loves him, everyones favorite player, seen as one of the best playmakers in history of the game but then the games start and the only thing he will contribute to your team is the good old myth how he cant defend and is a liability in midfield. There was a time where people out of desperation tried to sell him with his quotes video and that didnt went well as everyone soon enough started mocking that, yet take any player from 60s or before, not only will all quotes be taken into consideration, majority will cream their pants when they read it. So for good old times, one more time:



Considering i mentioned the good old myth of Scholes not being able to defend, lets adress that for the millionth and one time. We talk about a player that spent pretty much his entire career at highest possible level playing in a midfield two. Playing in two rather then three is a completely different ball game yet some that excelled in threes get the credit as defensively sound and people see no issues with them playing in two but someone that actually did it, is a liability. Funny old game. We wont go over the top and say that his defensive game was fantastic but it was good, it had to be. Problem is people see a "reckless" tackle, remember that and all of the sudden he cant defend. While he had few reckless ones, majority of his hard fouls were intentional, it was his way of protecting himself and sometimes getting his own little revenges as often people got frustrated that they cant get near the ball so they would kick him. I always use the game at Nou Camp as the team had a lot of defending to do, opposition was elite, and considering i made the compilation im sure it was all defensive work included though you can see a lot of his defensive game in other compilation on youtube, just pick long ones. As you can see, he is tactically very astute - very good positioning, often blocking passing lines. Good movement, helping closing spaces and helping his teammates.



His ability in possession i dont think we even need to sell? Spatial awareness second to none, not the best dribbler like Xavi for example but in the same time, like Xavi almost never caught in possession. His awareness of whats around him and elite football brain just always kept him one step ahead. I was always saying, take all his passing ability and he would still be best midfielder in the league. Speaking of passing, there are a lot of great passers but what separates Scholes is that he could do it from any position on the pitch, almost in every possible way. A lot of midfielders, even great ones had to have a bit of time to spread it, had ball right in front of them but Scholes was pinging them in from the run, from still position, first time, inside foot, outside foot, laces, from volleys. You name it, he done it. Often with his famous back spin where it just falls right onto teammates foot.



Regarding the role in our team, we feel its a perfect setup for him. Team set up to play on the counter with two great wide players, Mazzola that will drop so he can combine with him and duracell bunny in Davids that is also a very good footballer which is crucial. Scholes is one of the very best ones if not the best in isolating players for 1v1 duels, a wingers dream so no doubt Conti and Boniek would absolutely adore him.
Regarding his defensive game, he is in a team of 10 hardworking players that were defensively very apt. Surrounded with fast, energetic midfielders that played with high intensitiy - Boniek, Conti, Davids. Pretty much a perfect setup so in our eyes, its now or never for him to get any credit in a draft.

 

[Isotope]

Thanks, @GodShaveTheQueen . SOrry for the trouble.

Anyway, I'm off to bed. If @Himannv can chime in when possible.

I'll just leave this nice clip on Keegan, the year he received one of his Ballon d'Or. Those forward drives, excellent movement and pace, playmaking, and defending.

 

[Himannv]

Note 1: I'm slightly surprised that the left wing wasn't changed up after the criticism Boniek faced playing there. I felt he's alright there, particularly in R1, but at this stage of the draft you'd want a more proven option there in my view. When you compare that with Nedved and Littbarski in the opposition wings, there's something makeshift about Boniek there that throws off the setup. Riva switching to that flank doesn't work quite as well with Mazzola there as that upsets what is otherwise a nice front 2.

Note 2: I'm slightly disappointed by the lack of details in our opponent's OP about how they really intend to play without the ball. There is general mention of "working hard" but that's really vague when you compare it with a pressing team that is built for the press but also with enough quality on the ball to really hurt the opposition when we have it.

Note 3: I'd like to reiterate what the OP mentions about Passarella with some lesser detail. I think he's in a very optimum setup for him to impose his personality on the outcome of this game and I believe there will be minimal resistance to his forays into midfield with the DLP version of Scholes not really suited to stepping forward and pressing him. The free reign and the optimal tailored support cast around him really sets him up to be the difference maker in this game.

Here's another Passarella video here that nicely highlights his skills and impact on games.


He has a bit of everything really.

• Tackles
• Defensive headers
• Pace
• Set pieces
• Aerial threat
• Long distance strikes

The video in the OP highlights passing skills.

Desailly in front of him is a nice foil for him as he can cover and he has Bossis and Ruggeri on either side of him. This is about as perfect a setup for him as it gets and I think he will thrive.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

I'm slightly surprised that the left wing wasn't changed up after the criticism Boniek faced playing there.

It wasn't changed because the criticism was more or less bull crap. If @Šjor Bepo has taught me one thing, its to not change your team just because some people didn't appreciate or understand it. I mean in R1, EAP thought Vogts wasn't attacking enough behind Conti, were we to change him as well based on a non sensical suggestion?

For us, that left side is still as spectacular as we envisioned it during drafting. If anything, we have upgraded the Cabrini-Netto-Boniek-Riva axis to a Cabrini-Davids-Boniek-Riva.

I felt he's alright there, particularly in R1, but at this stage of the draft you'd want a more proven option there in my view.

Not sure I understand, he was okay in R1 but not in QF? That's a little weird. I am also a bit confused by what you mean by proven. If you mean an orthodox left winger like Zagallo or Giggs, then that is a more simpler option to sell, its by no means a more proven or less proven option. I wont repeat all that we posted in the last game, but off the ball, Boniek is as proven and brilliant on the left flank as it gets. On the ball, we have provided him an eco system he will excel in.

Note 2: I'm slightly disappointed by the lack of details in our opponent's OP about how they really intend to play without the ball. There is general mention of "working hard" but that's really vague when you compare it with a pressing team that is built for the press but also with enough quality on the ball to really hurt the opposition when we have it.

We are playing a standard counter attacking team mate. All our players are good on the ball be it in defense or midfield, so escaping the press is not something that would give us nightmares. If you had more specific questions on details, please feel free to shoot 'em, one of us will try to answer.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Note 3: I'd like to reiterate what the OP mentions about Passarella with some lesser detail. I think he's in a very optimum setup for him to impose his personality on the outcome of this game and I believe there will be minimal resistance to his forays into midfield with the DLP version of Scholes not really suited to stepping forward and pressing him. The free reign and the optimal tailored support cast around him really sets him up to be the difference maker in this game.

I have been giving Passarella a lot of thought once we drew you guys - regarding his suitability to a high press system. I am not really sold on him for this setup. Below is why - again this is really debatable and by no means I am asserting that what I say might be the gospel truth, just opening up the debate to neutral views on this.

Klopp's Liverpool is a great example to prove the importance of the CBs in this setups. Their results were night and day the season with and without Van Dijk. I am not sure if its a role that can afford a lot of freedom positionally. Quite a few times they will be left 1 vs 1 or 2 vs 2 on the counters high up the pitch considering the high press is deployed and their pace/reading of the game and knowing when to tackle an cut off the counters is crucial. Now Passarella was excellent with all of that, but its a role that requires a lot of discipline. Take the below picture you posted from the last game - do you think Hummels and Subotic at the half way line can afford even a bit of positional freedom away from where they are?

So below are what I don't like about Passarella in a high press system -

1. He has to curtail a lot of his natural forays forward and more or less play as a proper defender.
2. He is the most important cover for the team considering the high press tactic - so then having cover for him with Bossis/Desailly etc is a bit counter intuitive. That's essentially adding way too much complexity to the most important position in your setup without which, your whole setup crumbles, like Klopp's did.

 

[Himannv]

It wasn't changed because the criticism was more or less bull crap. If @sjor bepo has taught me one thing, its to not change your team just because some people didn't appreciate or understand it. I mean in R1, EAP thought Vogts wasn't attacking enough behind Conti, were we to change him as well based on a non sensical suggestion?

For us, that left side is still as spectacular as we envisioned it during drafting. If anything, we have upgraded the Cabrini-Netto-Boniek-Riva axis to a Cabrini-Davids-Boniek-Riva.

Not sure I understand, he was okay in R1 but not in QF? That's a little weird. I am also a bit confused by what you mean by proven. If you mean an orthodox left winger like Zagallo or Giggs, then that is a more simpler option to sell, its by no means a more proven or less proven option. I wont repeat all that we posted in the last game, but off the ball, Boniek is as proven and brilliant on the left flank as it gets. On the ball, we have provided him an eco system he will excel in.

I don't think it as a nonsensical suggestion to question Boniek's positioning on the wing considering he's not a winger. Your counter argument in the R1 game to Boniek being out of position was that Riva would swap with him. However, in this game you don't have Albert, who sort of balanced out that tactical aspect. With Mazzola here, your team is left without a focal point in attack if Riva moves out wider to swap positions with Boniek.

Boniek can probably do a job on the left wing, which is fine in a R1 game, but here we're talking about players in their ideal positions and with two reinforcements available you guys didn't choose to have ideal players to suit your setup and as such I'd say that's a misstep.

We are playing a standard counter attacking team mate. All our players are good on the ball be it in defense or midfield, so escaping the press is not something that would give us nightmares. If you had more specific questions on details, please feel free to shoot 'em, one of us will try to answer.

Counter attacking is what you do with the ball and not without it. A key question that I think all draft OPs should answer is how you plan on winning the ball. Because if you don't have the ball, everything else you've said about what you do with the ball doesn't matter. It also impacts understanding of how the game will play out because if you say zonal or man-marking or even pressing, there has to be some tactical consequence of how the opponent will fare against you.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Your counter argument in the R1 game to Boniek being out of position was that Riva would swap with him.

Not really. Check below post.

On Boniek, I was really excited about what we built and although Sjor and myself had disagreements on almost every other outfield position (including the defense believe it or not), the Boniek role and environment was one which we were both very very happy with.

We obviously expected a lot of debate on the subject, but I think the Netto/Riva choices have simply not been taken into consideration by almost every one of the neutral views. There have been mentions of why its okay because Cabrini is there, but I think that is really under appreciating the thought that went into the setup. I would never play Boniek-Cabrini in a 4-4-2 just by themselves. Its the supporting cast of Netto and Riva that actually makes it really beautiful.

As I noted earlier, the 4-4-2 is a pretty rigid formation and there is not a lot of room for flexible players like Boniek unless you can nail the setup around them and in this case we have done exactly that.

As Sjor noted earlier, a 4-4-2 is not always meant to be very rigid in the attacking phase. It only needs to be very rigid in the defensive phase by making sure the two banks of 4 are defensively sound. There is no question of the two banks of 4 and their functionality in our team, its perfect. If anyone questions that bit of it, they dont know what they are talking about.

In the attacking phase though, below are a few of the many variations the team will probably transform to based on the attacking options that develop. Unless you are playing with two orthodox wingers with an old fashioned strike partnership (like in P-nut's excellent 442), every other 4-4-2 will transform into some shape or the other in the attacking phase. The great thing about ours is the number of combinations is just incredibly many due to the Boniek-Riva-Netto-Cabrini build.

Boniek can probably do a job on the left wing, which is fine in a R1 game, but here we're talking about players in their ideal positions and with two reinforcements available you guys didn't choose to have ideal players to suit your setup and as such I'd say that's a misstep.

Fair enough if you think going with 2 orthodox wingers is the only way to build a 4-4-2, I obviously disagree but no point going in circles.

 

[Himannv]

I have been giving Passarella a lot of thought once we drew you guys - regarding his suitability to a high press system. I am not really sold on him for this setup. Below is why - again this is really debatable and by no means I am asserting that what I say might be the gospel truth, just opening up the debate to neutral views on this.

Klopp's Liverpool is a great example to prove the importance of the CBs in this setups. Their results were night and day the season with and without Van Dijk. I am not sure if its a role that can afford a lot of freedom positionally. Quite a few times they will be left 1 vs 1 or 2 vs 2 on the counters high up the pitch considering the high press is deployed and their pace/reading of the game and knowing when to tackle an cut off the counters is crucial. Now Passarella was excellent with all of that, but its a role that requires a lot of discipline. Take the below picture you posted from the last game - do you think Hummels and Subotic at the half way line can afford even a bit of positional freedom away from where they are?

So below are what I don't like about Passarella in a high press system -

1. He has to curtail a lot of his natural forays forward and more or less play as a proper defender.
2. He is the most important cover for the team considering the high press tactic - so then having cover for him with Bossis/Desailly etc is a bit counter intuitive. That's essentially adding way too much complexity to the most important position in your setup without which, your whole setup crumbles, like Klopp's did.

That graphic above, which we used in R1, shows what happens off the ball. When we don't have the ball, you wouldn't necessarily expect Passarella to be playing in midfield. However, if he was indeed out of position, we have the players to balance that in Desailly, who is very comfortable at CB and also Bossis who can also cover plus Ruggeri, who is a great defender in his own right (Isotope has more on him and can post that up when he's back). So it's really a situation where Passarella's offensive game can be compensated for and is a problem for the opponents to solve. If this kind of support around him does not give him a stage where he can shine, I don't know what will.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Counter attacking is what you do with the ball and not without it. A key question that I think all draft OPs should answer is how you plan on winning the ball.

So, enlighten me mate, how do you think one should explain on how the ball would be won? Sure, its more obvious to explain it with a high press, but how do you specifically explain how to win the ball back in a normal counter attacking setup?

Take for example, this game between us from the last draft. Can you tell me where exactly the OP addresses how to win the ball back, maybe I can pick up a thing or two

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/madn-draft-sf-himannv-vs-gstq.467824/

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

That graphic above, which we used in R1, shows what happens off the ball. When we don't have the ball, you wouldn't necessarily expect Passarella to be playing in midfield.

Except, that isn't how high press works. When you are in possession and you suddenly lose the ball, you immediately start pressing again. There is no transition phase of reorganizing the team and only then starting to press again. You cant dissociate 'Passarella on the ball' and 'Passarella off the ball'

we have the players to balance that in Desailly,

Its a setup with 2 midfielders mate. The idea of balancing the defenders forays forward with a midfielder is something that belongs in a 4-3-3. Since Desailly is covering back for him, its not like you are getting an extra midfielder out of it. Might as well just play a proper two way midfielder instead of Desailly then.

Again, let me be fair and reiterate, my problem is with Passarella having freedom in this setup to make forays forward. Play him as a proper defender who stays back and I am more than fine with it.

 

[Himannv]

So, enlighten me mate, how do you think one should explain on how the ball would be won? Sure, its more obvious to explain it with a high press, but how do you specifically explain how to win the ball back in a normal counter attacking setup?

Take for example, this game between us from the last draft. Can you tell me where exactly the OP addresses how to win the ball back, maybe I can pick up a thing or two

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/madn-draft-sf-himannv-vs-gstq.467824/

I'd say your OP was better than mine in that last match, and perhaps in many other matches. You're also a much better drafter than I am, so I don't think I'll be telling you anything new.

What I expect is at least some kind of defensive plan, like say a zonal setup, or a man-marking setup, or even parking the bus, or a deeper press, or something really to indicate how your team is tactically setup defensively. At the moment, I don't really know that if I look at the information you've given me so far. I can only presume it is a zonal setup with a normal defensive line, would that be correct?

 

[Šjor Bepo]

@Himannv scrappy is leading the debate so im only gonna answer this considering i was writting the op and im the one that usually vomplain for the lack of tactics.

Maybe i didnt adress it as i thought it was obvious considering the draft theme, there really is no sf behind a counter-attacking 442 IMO

Team is set up to play a deep-ish defence with 10 to 11 players behind the ball with Conti giving a little more leway so we can use him as the spear of our counters.
Marking is obviously zonal as otherwise it doesnt work.

 

[Himannv]

Except, that isn't how high press works. When you are in possession and you suddenly lose the ball, you immediately start pressing again.

Sure, which is why I said there'll be times that he's higher up the pitch and he'd have the necessary cover.

Its a setup with 2 midfielders mate. The idea of balancing the defenders forays forward with a midfielder is something that belongs in a 4-3-3. Since Desailly is covering back for him, its not like you are getting an extra midfielder out of it. Might as well just play a proper two way midfielder instead of Desailly then.

Again, let me be fair and reiterate, my problem is with Passarella having freedom in this setup to make forays forward. Play him as a proper defender who stays back and I am more than fine with it.

I dont think it's a tactic specific to 4-3-3. Positional switching happens in a wide variety of tactics. I'd say most systems that have that kind of a defender have some sort of balancing aspect to it or it wouldn't work.

 

[antohan]

Weird.

Read GSTQ highlighting how they prioritised defence and was thinking it was the attack I liked better.

Not that there's anything wrong with it, just that it was Himannv's defence I found more interesting and nuanced.

But then they start banging on about defensive setups and high lines, high presses, hunting in packs... Eh? It's a 442 draft, isn't it? I can't see that working at all with Passarella and Ruggeri.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Read GSTQ highlighting how they prioritised defence and was thinking it was the attack I liked better.

Not that there's anything wrong with it, just that it was Himannv's defence I found more interesting and nuanced.

Well yea, it's standard and boring if that is what you are hinting at.

But then they start banging on about defensive setups and high lines, high presses, hunting in packs... Eh? It's a 442 draft, isn't it? I can't see that working at all with Passarella and Ruggeri.

Thank you!

 

[antohan]

Re: Boniek.

No, he isn't a bog standard winger.

Can he play there? Sure.

Will he be effective? Depends.

If you ask him to play like a winger and stick to the role of winger, he'll be fine, not a liability by any means... but it's not Boniek. You are better off getting Lato on the right and switching Conti.

If you ask him to largely mind that side of the pitch but with the freedom to play like Boniek did, he'll be mint but you absolutely need a fullback who can provide width in the attacking phase. Proper wide play, not any old fullback. You know... someone like Cabrini.

Mind, I love Nedved at the other end, would have very likely been my default first round pick in this draft.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Pavel Nedved - The most important attacker for the opponent but is he the most effective?

Alright, time to go into another of the key players. Without a question of doubt, Nedved is the most important player in the attacking phase for the opposition. Considering the team lacks a midfield playmaker or a super creative support striker, the burden of creativity largely falls on Littbarski and Nedved. And while my love for Littbarski has never been lesser, its Nedved that is the shining armor in the opponents army.

So, while he is the gold standard for the left midfielder role in this formation and a default R1 pick for many as Antohan suggests, lets look at how effective he can be here in this game.

1. Unpredictability - Considering there are 2 main creative outlets in the opponents team, both out wide, the team does lose points on unpredictability that say someone like Boniek can offer. A well organized team should not be caught surprised by any of the opponents attacking patterns

2. Support from fullback - Bossis was no Marcelo/Carlos but he was also no nut who could not do his bit to support Nedved on the ball. But then the question arises, is he really in a position to do so? He is already tasked with covering for Passarella's forays forward, so one would assume his contribution to that left flank should be precious little. That does not do Nedved and the left side of the attack any favors considering the team is already short on unpredictability.

3. Berti Vogts - Now with Bossis not likely to offer too much going forward based on the opponents tactical setup, it would more often than not be a 1 vs 1 battle for Nedved against Vogts. Without going nto whether Vogts was a better defender than Nedved was an attacker, lets look at Nedved's modus operandi. He wont just stick to the flanks but try to impact the game along that whole left-central zone. Does Vogts remind you of a certain someone who was dominant in those left central areas as well whom Vogts marked out quite well in a high profile game tracking him like a shadow? I am of course talking about Johan Cruyff and the 1974 WC final. I can see Nedved vs Vogts going the same way with Vogts having the freedom to track and harass Nedved all around those left central zones..

So long story short - the lack of unpredictability, a setup that does not allow enough freedom for the LB to join the attacks and an opponent who had one of the games of his career against an all time great who loved the same zones as Nedved makes us believe the Czech great might not be as effective here as he can be in a 4-4-2

 

[Isotope]

Pavel Nedved - The most important attacker for the opponent but is he the most effective?

Alright, time to go into another of the key players. Without a question of doubt, Nedved is the most important player in the attacking phase for the opposition. Considering the team lacks a midfield playmaker or a super creative support striker, the burden of creativity largely falls on Littbarski and Nedved. And while my love for Littbarski has never been lesser, its Nedved that is the shining armor in the opponents army.

So, while he is the gold standard for the left midfielder role in this formation and a default R1 pick for many as Antohan suggests, lets look at how effective he can be here in this game.

1. Unpredictability - Considering there are 2 main creative outlets in the opponents team, both out wide, the team does lose points on unpredictability that say someone like Boniek can offer. A well organized team should not be caught surprised by any of the opponents attacking patterns

2. Support from fullback - Bossis was no Marcelo/Carlos but he was also no nut who could not do his bit to support Nedved on the ball. But then the question arises, is he really in a position to do so? He is already tasked with covering for Passarella's forays forward, so one would assume his contribution to that left flank should be precious little. That does not do Nedved and the left side of the attack any favors considering the team is already short on unpredictability.

3. Berti Vogts - Now with Bossis not likely to offer too much going forward based on the opponents tactical setup, it would more often than not be a 1 vs 1 battle for Nedved against Vogts. Without going nto whether Vogts was a better defender than Nedved was an attacker, lets look at Nedved's modus operandi. He wont just stick to the flanks but try to impact the game along that whole left-central zone. Does Vogts remind you of a certain someone who was dominant in those left central areas as well whom Vogts marked out quite well in a high profile game tracking him like a shadow? I am of course talking about Johan Cruyff and the 1974 WC final. I can see Nedved vs Vogts going the same way with Vogts having the freedom to track and harass Nedved all around those left central zones..

So long story short - the lack of unpredictability, a setup that does not allow enough freedom for the LB to join the attacks and an opponent who had one of the games of his career against an all time great who loved the same zones as Nedved makes us believe the Czech great might not be as effective here as he can be in a 4-4-2

1. How does Boniek can offer more than Nedved on the wing? Boniek is one trick phoney, (a fine one though) while Nedved is one of the best wide playmaker. Other than him and Liitbarski, we have Tigana in midfield as a mighty fine creative outlet also. Then Keegan and Kempes who can drift back who are creative force also.
Then there is Maxime Bossis, who on the words of Platini:

"A football match should be decided by an action of play.
Not some contrived process whose end result is to mark a fine player such as Bossis,
Baresi or Baggio for the rest of his career."


2. Bossis could not support Nedved on the ball? Passarella does not go up all the time in the match. He's not Vasovic. Then we have Desailly to cover Passarella if needed.

3. Keegan fancy that left channel also. Unpredictability and dynamic are two obvious aspects of our team. We have so many players who are comfortable playing on different positions. Nedved and Littbarski in wing and central, Bossis in LB and CB, Desailly in DM and CB, Lahm in RB and DM, Kempes as second striker and striker, and Keegan drifting everywhere.

 

[Isotope]

Another biggish point for our team advantage is set-pieces.

1. Significant advantage at set pieces with many aerially dominant players: Passarella, Desailly, Ruggeri, Kempes, Keegan, and Bossis.

With a fine delivery by Lahm or Nedved, I can see we'll score goal(s) as opponent don't have enough players to cope with ours.

 

[Isotope]

Weird.

Read GSTQ highlighting how they prioritised defence and was thinking it was the attack I liked better.

Not that there's anything wrong with it, just that it was Himannv's defence I found more interesting and nuanced.

But then they start banging on about defensive setups and high lines, high presses, hunting in packs... Eh? It's a 442 draft, isn't it? I can't see that working at all with Passarella and Ruggeri.

We didn't properly explain. But of course CB won't be hunting also but discipline in position when pressing. It's more about the move of the team in general, like that Himannv's Dortmund graph shows.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

How does Boniek can offer more than Nedved on the wing?

Its not about who offers more or less mate, I am not even arguing who the better player is. But when it comes to unpredictability, I dont think anyone who has watched Boniek play would disagree that his runs are a testament to his unpredictability.

Boniek is one trick phoney

There are so many mistakes in just those 5 words mate. Boniek actually didn't have a single trick he was special at. Also, its one trick 'pony' and not one trick 'phoney'

Other than him and Liitbarski, we have Tigana in midfield as a mighty fine creative outlet

I mean, you realize you are scrapping the bottom of the barrel when you want to add Tigana as a one of your creative outlets? Mighty fine player for sure and wasn't a nut on the ball by any stretch of imagination, but listing him as your 3rd creative outlet just proves what I have been getting at regarding the lack of creativity centrally from your team.

Then Keegan and Kempes who can drift back who are creative force also.

Drift back, yes. Creative, no. Both were very direct and definitely could drop deep to help with build up, but neither of them were elite creative passers who can open up defenses.

2. Bossis could not support Nedved on the ball? Passarella does not go up all the time in the match. Then we have Desailly to cover Passarella if needed.

You'll have to make your mind up mate, it can't be both surely? How do they decide whether Passarella joins the build up or Bossis? Or do they take turns? In real world games though, managers decide and train the team on which one will join the attacks and which one will stay back.

3. Keegan fancy that left channel also. Unpredictability and dynamic are two obvious aspects of our team. We have so many players who are comfortable playing on different positions. Nedved and Littbarski in wing and central, Bossis in LB and CB, Desailly in DM and CB, Lahm in RB and DM, Kempes as second striker and striker, and Keegan drifting everywhere.

Am not sure how Bossis/Desailly/Lahm help with creative unpredictability in the attacking phase on the ball to be honest.

 

[antohan]

Nedved is one of the best wide playmaker. Other than him and Liitbarski, we have Tigana in midfield as a mighty fine creative outlet also. Then Keegan and Kempes who can drift back who are creative force also.

Actually, I drool at the Nedved-Litti flanks but not impressed with the rest.

Keegan and Kempes call for a different partner. Same goes for the midfield. Tigana is fine there but Desailly makes it too workmanlike for my liking, even more than the dull Butt-Keane pairing.

Then there is Maxime Bossis, who on the words of Platini:

"A football match should be decided by an action of play.
Not some contrived process whose end result is to mark a fine player such as Bossis,
Baresi or Baggio for the rest of his career."

Out of interest, what's the context/story behind that? It's an odd trio that, no overlap as internationals so can't work out what it means at all.

We didn't properly explain. But of course CB won't be hunting also but discipline in position when pressing. It's more about the move of the team in general, like that Himannv's Dortmund graph shows.

I just don't see it mate. A high press does indeed require positional discipline, sticking to a shape and acting in a coordinated way.

Passarella is a libero, it's the opposite of positional discipline and in fact compromises that of those around him. Desailly operates relative to what Daniel is up to, that's his disciplined command. Ruggeri is stuck in no man's land without the pace to pull it off... Bossis has it (deceptively, he never looked in any rush, but that was down to his positioning being outstanding), tuck him in?

Suddenly the entire concerted pressing has gone out of the window and turned into an afterthought. See what I mean?

 

[Isotope]

Actually, I drool at the Nedved-Litti flanks but not impressed with the rest.

Keegan and Kempes call for a different partner. Same goes for the midfield. Tigana is fine there but Desailly makes it too workmanlike for my liking, even more than the dull Butt-Keane pairing.


Out of interest, what's the context/story behind that? It's an odd trio that, no overlap as internationals so can't work out what it means at all.


I just don't see it mate. A high press does indeed require positional discipline, sticking to a shape and acting in a coordinated way.

Passarella is a libero, it's the opposite of positional discipline and in fact compromises that of those around him. Desailly operates relative to what Daniel is up to, that's his disciplined command. Ruggeri is stuck in no man's land without the pace to pull it off... Bossis has it (deceptively, he never looked in any rush, but that was down to his positioning being outstanding), tuck him in?

Suddenly the entire concerted pressing has gone out of the window and turned into an afterthought. See what I mean?

- well it's 2nd round. None is perfect players wise, mate. Yes admittedly we need to improve on the CB, CM, and striker. Now it's more about building a team to have potential to improve much further, and hopefully it's better than the current opponent (which I think we have both, but understandable if others think opposite).

- Passarella's strength is supposedly adding dimension to the team from defence. I personally think we have personals to bring out his best, including partners. Players like him is also smart enough to adapt to a slight unfavorable condition. That's why he's one of the GOAT. But i can't argue much if some think it's a negative trait.

- I'm not sure about background of Platini's quote. I couldn't find any article on that.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Its not about who offers more or less mate, I am not even arguing who the better player is. But when it comes to unpredictability, I dont think anyone who has watched Boniek play would disagree that his runs are a testament to his unpredictability.

First time in seeing unpredictability being described as a advantage

 

[antohan]

Passarella's strength is supposedly adding dimension to the team from defence. I personally think we have personals to bring out his best, including partners. Players like him is also smart enough to adapt to a slight unfavorable condition. That's why he's one of the GOAT. But i can't argue much if some think it's a negative trait.

As I said earlier, straight off the bat (i.e. just looking at teamsheets) I favoured your defensive setup. There's nothing wrong with your defence, or Passarella, it's just incompatible with your tactical instructions.

 

[Isotope]

As I said earlier, straight off the bat (i.e. just looking at teamsheets) I favoured your defensive setup. There's nothing wrong with your defence, or Passarella, it's just incompatible with your tactical instructions.

i see. Hummels is much slower than Ruggeri but could pull it off on high line tactic. Ruggeri is not a speedy demond or ideal but has Lahm which is pretty fast. It's not perfect but hopefully the team as overall can cope with it for now.

 

[antohan]

i see. Hummels is much slower than Ruggeri but could pull it off on high line tactic. Ruggeri is not a speedy demond or ideal but has Lahm which is pretty fast. It's not perfect but hopefully the team as overall can cope with it for now.

Where do I say high lines require all defenders to be speed demons? I think what I said was quite clear: either the positional discipline of those around Passarella is dictated by his freedom as a libero, or it is dictated by the systematic fulfilment of your gegenpress tactical instruction. They can't both coexist, it's the old "can't have your cake and eat it".

 

[Himannv]

Where do I say high lines require all defenders to be speed demons? I think what I said was quite clear: either the positional discipline of those around Passarella is dictated by his freedom as a libero, or it is dictated by the systematic fulfilment of your gegenpress tactical instruction. They can't both coexist, it's the old "can't have your cake and eat it".

I didn't want to post more (not sure what the rules are on AMs posting) but I have trouble understanding the point raised here. Gegenpressing is an off the ball tactic, while Passarella stepping forward happens if he has the ball and Desailly simply slots into CB. If the team then loses the ball and Passarella is further forward, Desailly is still a the back covering his position so there is no positional impact as such and the team more or less looks the same in formation. CBs stepping forward and positional switching is not completely unusual in a pressing system - I mean, Atalanta and RBL do it/did it to varying extents so I don't see it as something that far out of the norm as you are implying.

 

[antohan]

I didn't want to post more (not sure what the rules are on AMs posting) but I have trouble understanding the point raised here.

I doubt anyone can complain. If anything I've been posting more than I would have liked to.

Gegenpressing is an off the ball tactic, while Passarella stepping forward happens if he has the ball and Desailly simply slots into CB. If the team then loses the ball and Passarella is further forward, Desailly is still a the back covering his position so there is no positional impact as such and the team more or less looks the same in formation. CBs stepping forward and positional switching is not completely unusual in a pressing system - I mean, Atalanta and RBL do it/did it to varying extents so I don't see it as something that far out of the norm as you are implying.

I guess it boils down to what we see Passarella doing.

I see him overloading and impacting the game where he sees fit, not just "stepping forward" and simply swapping positions with Desailly. Yeah, you could argue it should be fine. That's not a great use of prime Passarella though.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Then there is Maxime Bossis, who on the words of Platini:

"A football match should be decided by an action of play.
Not some contrived process whose end result is to mark a fine player such as Bossis,
Baresi or Baggio for the rest of his career."

Out of interest, what's the context/story behind that? It's an odd trio that, no overlap as internationals so can't work out what it means at all.

This can actually be an excellent quiz question. What do Bossis, Baresi and Baggio have in common?

The context for Platini's quote is he made it after the 1994 WC final where Baresi and Baggio missed penalties and Italy lost. Bossis missed the penalty in the 1982 WC semis shootout against Germany that eliminated France. Was basically saying that penalties are a shit way to settle a draw and one high profile penalty miss can result in leaving a mark on the legacy of fine players like Bossis/Baresi/Baggio

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

First time in seeing unpredictability being described as a advantage

There are two kinds of unpredictable

1. I dont know whether he will turn up or or not
2. I dont know where on the pitch he will turn up

The first kind is Pogba, you dont want that kind of unpredictability.
The second kind is Boniek, you want that kind of unpredictability.

 

[Theon]

First time in seeing unpredictability being described as a advantage

I get the point around unpredictable players not being an issue, but don’t think it applies as well to a 4-4-2 with Scholes in midfield no less. Felt the same the last game and would prefer a more disciplined player there, and if you ask Boniek to play that role it’s not getting the best out of him.

The Boniek > Nedved post is a bit of a stretch.

 

[Theon]

You'll have to make your mind up mate, it can't be both surely? How do they decide whether Passarella joins the build up or Bossis? Or do they take turns? In real world games though, managers decide and train the team on which one will join the attacks and which one will stay back.

This comes up all the time in drafts and is probably the single biggest frustration I have reading the debates (along with the tendency to see everything as 1 vs 1 individual battles). In reality players pick and choose when to push forward all the time. Bossis also doesn’t even need to breaking forward to the opposing corner flag to play a supporting role to Nedved.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

Good game @Isotope @Himannv , unfortunately, we are not done yet as it seems to be a draw score line.

From the draft thread OP

7 - Draw will be decided by the vote of someone who hasn't voted yet

How I was planning on implementing this is to tag all the draft participants who did not vote and the first one to respond with a winning vote counts. Kind of like a golden goal. So here we go.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

@Zlatan 7 @Earvin Johnson @TheReligion @Skizzo @Jim Beam

Kindly settle the draw and pick a winner in this game. You cant vote anymore but you can comment your vote on who will win. Only the first vote counts

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

@Lord SInister @Paul Scholes @Pat_Mustard @Stobzilla

Kindly settle the draw and pick a winner in this game. You cant vote anymore but you can comment your vote on who will win. Only the first vote counts

 

[Gio]

Could've been a semi or a final this one. Can't really fault either side. The frameworks around Passarella and Boniek look well constructed to me. Passarella in particular looks spot on. Boniek is a bit of a crowbar as I think he should be a SS for this draft, but he fits with the personnel and supporting structure. Love the Keegan/Kempes partnership though - I'm thinking Valencia Kempes who was more of a classic centre-forward - just spot on for a 4-4-2. Davids and Scholes are a cracking combo as well.