Doesn't work well all the time. Bastekas or Pusten ain't goin nowhereIs Elkenigge now a thing? Do we start giving draft pairings nicknames? That's kinda great.
The Euro Draft - SF - harms vs Joga Bonito
- Thread starter Balu
- Start date
I really think that this is Joga's best formation - yes, I will bother him with my left side, but he has Pluskal and Desailly here to cover. Despite Joga keeping a straight face here, we all know that 7:1 is not something that I can overcome here, especially against such well-constructed side as his, so don't think that I'm not saying this genuinely.
Dzarozza?Doesn't work well all the time. Bastekas or Pusten ain't goin nowhere
Tbh, I would just swap Suarez with Effenberg in original formation.
5-3-2 with Pluskal and Effenberg running loads for Platini and a front 2. Much simpler.
Suarez is needed as a Pre-66 I think.
Suarez, whom I don't like here and I don't think that he will compliment Platini, is a must - because Joga only has Pluskal and Platzer-Taibi as his pre-66 players.
Suarez would definitely not be at his very best here, as is always the case when a team is not completely built around the player. But he'd be pretty damn brilliant anyhow, with his Euro form in consideration even more so. Here is a video of how he played, off the ball runs were a huge part of his game and he was a lot more gritty than he gets credit for so far.
He was a little bit jack of all trades, comfortable at finding space where he found it - sneaking out wide and loved the inside channels on both sides as well.
He was a little bit jack of all trades, comfortable at finding space where he found it - sneaking out wide and loved the inside channels on both sides as well.
Yeah, it's certainly is the reason. When you look at his performance against Germany in 1976, for example, there are three different stages of his game. In the first 50-60 minutes or so he plays like a god, he finds his teammates with his great passing and he feels strong enough to constantly take on (and win) Vogts. In the last 30-20 minutes, when he thinks that the game is done, he plays it safe and keeps it simple - both strategically and because he is already tired, he was way past his peak at the time. And then, when Germany scored and moved this to the extra-time, he decides "feck it!". He knows that his teammates are already tired and don't believe that they can win it, so he pick the ball and run, pick the ball and run, he finds himself in dangerous positions inside the box, he gets fouled a lot (a very Alonso-esque foul from Beckenbauer, how the hell was not a red?)... That's what happens when he realises that his teammates are useless pieces of crap that lost their 2:0 lead and failed to score from his crosses to make it 3:0
But he is playing with his equals here.Well, I believe that he had a good tournament. Like always, he was stopped just before the happy ending, when he thought that he did everything to secure it. I don't think that you or EAP will pick him for the final, but he deserves a TotT inclusion here, he was absolutely immense in the first rounds.
Ruud van Puskas? Sounds like Van Nistelrooy on steroids.Doesn't work well all the time. Bastekas or Pusten ain't goin nowhere
Meazza I think would provide a lot of similar width as Rummenigge or Elkjaer would in his role. Great at making his way out wide as well, fantastic dribbler. Unfortunately it is hard to find footage of him.
Yups, as is Platzer instead of Taibi (
).Agree though that Effenberg still works better if it were possible. Still not ideal, but goes to show how surplus to requirements Suárez' best attributes are here.
Still, I don't agree with the logic of dropping Demyanenko. He is getting a rough ride from @harms but he is absolutely fine in that role and the system overall works better with 3 + WBs IMO.
Give me some more time, will respond to this.
Agreed with that. Demyanenko is fine here.
Maybe, the best formation without age restrictions certainly includes Demyanenko instead of Suarez here, but with them I would prefer Effenberg in the centre.
It's just that Demyanenko, who is fine by himself, is still one of the weakest performers on the pitch (well, look at the names, no shame here), and he is up against the best LB and the best LW in the draft. Hence the critique.
Never give up so easily, stranger things have happened (@The Stain closed down a much wider gap for a while in the other semi).
You are also arguing things well and certainly have a proper well-constructed side. You should be tagging @Fergus'son as well. There's only one worse thing than scanvoters voting against you without feedback and that's draft regulars expressing their favourable opinion of a team that is losing but then never actually voting
Has driven me up the wall a few times And that's the reason why I'd have it as a back 5 with Bergomi covering. Demyanenko + Bergomi is sound enough without jeopardising the due attention required for Sarosi and Meazza. The Desailly anchor that drops + Moore combo doesn't work for me. Moore gets left behind with Bergomi away and absolutely needing Desailly to drop/not get beaten by a ball over the top or else Moore could be facing both Sarosi and Meazza 2v1 against him.
It's fair to say Facchetti need not be as attacking as usual, but allowing for that I'd take Desailly as CB and someone like Stielike or Rijkaard in the role assigned to Desailly. Basically, that defensive line needs Desailly in it.
The Giresse comparison seems a good one to me, and its what I originally thought of when I was judging whether Suarez/Platini would work. Suarez seems to have shared Giresse's ability to peel out wide to create chances too, which is a bonus given that Platini tended to operate so centrally. I'm confident the could work together.Yes mate, it would work. In the sense that Suárez was a tactically intelligent player in the mould of a CM/AM for Spain '64 but he wasn't a Pirlo or heck even a Xavi type of a player who would hamper Platini here.
"I started deep but covered a lot of ground and I had a wide perspective and vision. I had a change of pace, good technique and could shoot from outside the box." He shares a special affinity with one of his Barça successors, saying: "I recognise myslef in Andrés Iniesta, because he's always looking to finish off a move himself or looking for a team-mate to score."
As Suárez himself says, a more versatile and tactically intelligent player like Iniesta would be the more apt comparison here. A fine hybrid of a ball carrying player and a passer who is versatile in various phases with added tactical nous and a fair bit of defensive ability (under tutelage from Herrera at this time naturally).
I've posted this video a lot of times and said that he didn't morph into a Pirlo during his Inter phase a few times as well
The point being that he is perfect here as a tactically intelligent player who can stay deep when needed and play a supporting role to Platini or make a forward incision and go on one of his mazy runs if Platini decides to drop deep (a key feature of Platini's game). It gives them both a wide berth to function in and gets the best out of them. Just think of an immense upgrade of Giresse who also can function as a CM. He is absolutely vital in this set-up. I knew I might face the two playmakers = Not complementary accusations etc. Heck I even got that for Suarez-Schuster in my sheep draft initially but the key was that they both had a fair mix of qualities that meant they could function together. Platini is more rigid than Schuster, most definitely, however it is the CM-AM version of Suárez here and not the Barca AM version or the Inter DLP version which would be a bad fit here. It isn't like I'am playing Bozsik (whom I very well could have got in reinforcements and he does get rated very highly, justifiably so) or say, Netzer here.
The Spain version who remained fairly central but still loved to burst forward when needed is perfect here. For instance, as stated in the OP, Suárez assisted 2 and played a major role in the other of the 3 goals that Spain scored in the semis and the final of the Euro 1964, which they won and he was widely regarded as the best player of the tournament.
I agree. Suarez is not a ball hugging playmaker, rather a very all round player with good dribbling, great off the ball runs and he linked up great with most players he played with. "Pass - then run in to space" type of player who could be so effective because he handled the wide areas as well which made him operate at a really high level everywhere.
The thing is Suarez is far more than a better version of Giresse. Would he be content with a Giresse role? Probably not. One of the cases where the total is slightly lesser than sum of its parts imo. Functional not optimal.
The midfield now looks a little lightweight, isn't it?
I don't even for a minute think Suárez won't work. It is more a case of Joga needing a more defensively sound midfielder. To be honest, sticking Pluskal there doesn't fly with me at this stage.
That said, I don't think Joga needs "mean midfield dominance", his defence is rock solid now, his transition superb and his front three
I don't have Suárez down as an egomaniac myself. Being a great player doesn't stop you being a team player.
Yes, that's the issue, which could be costly if only you had a bit more oomph upfront (relative to his defence). It's a back and forth game with him more likely to score every time, no slight on your forwards' credentials or the quality of your defenders overall. It's just a case of both his defence and attack looking like units that would work more cohesively drawing out the very best performance each of them are capable of.
I'd have to strongly disagree with the bolded claim. He is absolutely what I needed in my midfield. Firstly I needed someone who could dovetail with Platini without having any of the ball hogging and ego-clash issues and also without requiring his team mates to be subservient on the ball to him - ala Giresse for eg. Secondly, I preferably needed someone who could play as a CM-AM hybrid with defensive nous and tactical nous in the CM phase in combination with the dribbling, creativity, link-up play and ability to transition into an AM and also pose a threat higher up the pitch when Platini drops deep, in the AM phase. Suarez gives me all that and then some. Basically, quality and a phenomenally well-rounded game without being a player who needs others to be subservient on the ball to him.
It all does sound like too much, I understand but hey judge him for yourself.
Suarez at the Euros. (CLICK FOR SUAREZ'S EURO COMPILATION)
Just look at him - he is as complete as they come. Intercepting balls, playing long balls from a deeper area, going forward intelligently only when it was required to supplement Pareda and Amancio - instead of being an unwanted presence hindering his attacking players, tackling, dribbling from out wide, playing 1-2s and most importantly being where the situation needs him to be. He wasn't hogging the ball, solely playing one-twos/passes like a Pirlo/Xavi, he wasn't purely attacking/dribbling like an AM and he wasn't just doing defensive work like a pure DM. He was doing all off the above in fine balance. Seriously, he is one of the most tactically accomplished, malleable and complete players of all time and people criminally seem to overlook quite a few of his qualities. There are a few players that you watch and you think - now there is a tactical mastermind at work like Xavi/Scholes etc. Suarez was exactly that but an all-round package as opposed to his average playmaking contemporaries. You could place 10 dogs or 10 Maradonas around him and he'll still function beautifully.
I personally abhor it when 2 ill-suited playmakers get shoehorned into a system but it couldn't be further from the case here. There just couldn't be a better fit for my tactics or a more complementary partner for Platini than El Arquitecto with the ravenous Elkenigge ahead of them. I really wish I could upload the whole match, just so you guys can see how complete a tactical performance it was.
Last edited:
Aye, I completely agree.
I wouldn't necessarily disagree with the bolded part, but I'm not sure that it matters that much. Even if Suarez is functioning at 80-90% of his best ever performances due to taking a back seat to Platini, we're still dealing with an all-time great midfielder.
Agreed on Suarez, but I loved Joga's original formation and I wish he hadn't moved Desailly to centre back. For me he was at his absolute peak as a defensive midfielder and I found nothing wrong with Joga's tactical depiction of him. This is probably his most iconic performance
and he spends so much time stationed 5-10 yards in front of his defence, whilst still bursting forwards and pressing further up the pitch depending on how he reads the game. Pluskal, I admit, is a mystery to me and in the absence of any argument to the contrary I'm just viewing him as a very good but not great all-rounder like an Antonio Conte.
He might not be the most flashy of names but he really does have impeccable Euro (CEIC) credentials and was regarded as one of the best defensive midifelders of his era.
One of the greatest defensive midfielders to ever play in the CEIC, SVATOPLUK PLUSKAL
(clearly trumps Hanappi when it comes to thighs as well
)Forming an irrepressible engine-room tandem alongside Josef Masopust, Pluskal was the unyielding lynchpin in midfield who allowed Masopust the liberty to express his creative talents and the freedom to go on his mesmerising slaloming runs. The midfield colossus played an integral role in Czechoslovakia's run to the WC 1962 final - the first time an European team made the final on South American soil- where they eventually succumbed to Garrincha's wizardry.
His status as one of the best centre-halves of his era was established by his appearance in the Rest of the World XI against England, in Wembley to commemorate the prestigious centenary year of English football. A quick look at the XI would be revealing (Yashin-Djalma Santos-Schnellinger-PLUSKAL-Popluhar-Masopust-Kopa-Denis Law-Di Stefano-Eusebio-Gento, with Puskas and Seeler on the bench); truly your cream of the crop bunch and not your average past it ceremonial XI. He once again figured in an Europe XI (featuring amongst the likes of Seeler and Eusebio) against Yugoslavia a year later, cementing his standing as a world class centre half.
His Central European International Cup exploits were incredible to say the least, for what is perhaps the best Czechoslovakian team of all time. Simply put, he did not lose a single game in the tournament; his individual record reads P8 W6 D2 L0. He played 7 games in Czechoslovakia's victorious campaign of the final version of the CEIC, whereby they pipped the legendary Mighty Magyars to the title by a single point. They only suffered a single defeat throughout the tournament, losing 1-3 to Hungary in their first encounter, a match in which, needless to say, Pluskal didn't feature. In the return fixture, Pluskal proved to be the difference as they inflicted the solitary defeat of Hungary's tournament, an encounter which would ultimately prove to be the match which determined the champions of the tournament.
done. Sorry for the delay, went to bed shortly before you posted.
Np mate.
I like the change Joga, changed my vote.. to clarify for me the Suarez-Platini combination wasn't an issue, it was more me posing the question to see how you'd respond and explain it.
I like the defence better now and Effenberg adds to an already one sided midfield battle in my opinion. Your team will dictate the game, more numbers in there and simply the better midfielders too taken as a whole.
I like the defence better now and Effenberg adds to an already one sided midfield battle in my opinion. Your team will dictate the game, more numbers in there and simply the better midfielders too taken as a whole.
??? He's still on the bench, isn't he?
Oh fair enough. Also, I think you looked at the pic that harms posted as my formation change but it isn't. It's the one below, which is my change. If you want to change back your vote due to the misunderstanding, it's fine.
I prefer it to the one above for a few reasons. Mainly Demyanenko-Bergomi would be better suited in dealing with harms left flank of Facchetti-Dzajic and whilst Effenberg is a more voter-friendly player and a nice option to have, his inclusion at the cost of Demyanenko's exclusion isn't tactically worth it in this match-up imo. Besides the midfield trio of Pluskal-Suárez-Platini is a perfect blend of goals, technique, creativity, steel and more importantly tactical nous and is good enough as it is.
Btw, what are your thoughts on the match? Just want to get a discussion going
and perhaps more feedback on my set-up.Oh my bad, apologies Joga but my point still stands re: Suarez, Platini - not an issue.
I definitely prefer his midfield version and actually spent the last game screaming bloody murder he was wasted as one of three defenders on Baros.
In this case though the defence absolutely needed him and the case for him in midfield was comparatively weak.
In fact, this game is a killer blow for Team EAP as Desailly for Deschamps would have both improved his already great midfield and quelled any concerns on his defence.
I actually give him more credit than that, but taking your Conte: do you really think Suárez was what that midfield needed next to a Conte?
It's a bit fallacious though as Pluskal ain't a Conte. In fact, he would make a very complementary mudfield pair, but with Platini in there I get the feeling a different sortof player would be a better fit.
The last manager to invoke that game as proof of quality was @Cutch, but you seem to have overlooked Fefo Eyzaguirre on the bench there.
Calamity is an understatement.
Why what happened in Cutch's match? I don't really know too much about Eyzaguirre tbh, but the game itself did seem all right, in that it was a fixture celebrating a prestigious event and it was fairly competitive. Back when the Rest of the World/Europe XIs etc and friendlies used to mean something.The last manager to invoke that game as proof of quality was @Cutch, but you seem to have overlooked Fefo Eyzaguirre on the bench there.
Calamity is an understatement.
This is what happened. Two SUPER teams packed with players of the highest possible calibre. The second worst player on the pitch was probably Henry... except he happened to be against Eyzaguirre.
@Cutch not turning down Cristiano when he had Figo already (probably a better fit too, with Best on the other wing)."He'll be fine", famous last words
After 2-3 pages of various arguments on who had who and how X covered Y and basically all players match one to one, seeing as no player ever beats another so long as there is one assigned...
Eyzaguirre EXPOSED
This prompted me to watch one of the most dour games of football I've seen. I was making a clip but it was taking forever as I had to keep stopping, chopping, etc. and these were the most inept Italians I've ever seen so they did no damage as a result. Ultimately, once Italy were reduced to 9 you could also excuse him being so far up the pitch and relying on the CB to cover (he does, a lot).Brwned said:
So I picked the Brazil game and fast forwarded to the four goals conceded. Lo and behold, he is at fault or has "WTF?" moments/positioning in all of them.
But surely, if playing for Rest of the World (their manager being the Chile manager) is testament to his quality and how he peaked so brightly as one of the best in the World, why not find footage on that game? He would then be playing alongside the sort of players on this draft! Brilliant.
Here it is, he came on in the second half at 0-0 for Djalma Santos. The guy really is not a defender. Everyone caught on to that immediately as most of the England attacks switched from right to left flank from one half to the next (despite England not making subs).
His positioning is atrocious, half the time you don't have the first clue what he could possibly be doing. He is lackadaisical, walks around watching on as his side is torn apart, has no composure, no reaction, no physical presence, nothing.
He is without a shadow of a doubt the worst fullback in this draft, John O'Shea would actually do a more competent job on Henry, and I'm not exaggerating.
But enough of me talking, here's Eyzaguirre playing with the very best, straight from English Pathé. You make up your own mind.
You may need to watch that a few times for it to sink in as some of the play is
Of course, the Chilean press had some major coverage of the event, blamed the rest of the team for not showing up (serious, I have the full article) and highlighted Yashin's performance in the first half -helps explain the goals that he came out, although he was indeed exceptional- and Eyzaguirre as one of the few bright lights in the RotW performance.
Then updated the first post after the OP (a great trick that has faded with time).
The guy seriously looks like someone out of my local Sunday League team.
Game over.
Also, always the gentleman
Last edited:
Pele, Maradona, Beckenbauer, Rijkaard, Figueroa, Andrade and Facchetti in one team. Christ
.When Henry is hands down your worst player, it says something. Even then he can play as a tactical role of making runs cutting inside, freeing up space for Facchetti to do the damage. Even Cutch's team was excellent bar the flank of Ronaldo and Eyzaguirre (relative to the company they had ofc).
Thats what we were hoping for, was a no brainer upgrade for our side. Now its going to be a lot tougher.
It's called good planning. I didn't pick and Argie in the drafting stage, reserving that for Maradona and only picked Rivelino as the 12th pick (honest!
Pele, Maradona, Beckenbauer, Rijkaard, Figueroa, Andrade and Facchetti in one team. Christ
). Pickeed Effenberg in midfield hoping I would straight upgrade him with Kaiser or Matthäus. A bit of luck as well: started the first game with Arsenio Erico upfront However much I love the 1958 striker incarnation of Pelé, my ideal final team was this but with Ronaldo Fenómeno or Romario, but I never crosssed paths with those who had them.
Indeed, where were you that entire game when people told me I should swap Stoichkov and Henry because I needed a left-footer to expose Eyzaguirre? The whole point was Facchetti and Henry would work EXACTLY how you want it to work. They would completely destroy a great rightback, let alone a comical one.
Yeah, something seems off about Maradona and Pele being together tactically but one of Ronaldo or Romario in front of Maradona would have been tactically optimum and insane.
Aye.