Fantasy Tournament: World Cup All-Time All-Stars

I don't think we can be too negative about Rijkaard. He has had a very average world cup but he should still go in the first 4 rounds.
 
Don't be a little prick antohan



I don't see how it is though because Baresi was still the better player when he was at that world cup, Cannavaro just happened to have the games of his life. He played better in those few games, but wasn't the better player.

I'm not trying to take the piss here, just get my head around what I should be picking on. I've PMed Snow the two possible picks and waiting for him to confirm which one he thinks.

From what I'm gathering from what you've said this isn't like a normal draft where the two teams in the matches go up against each other in a hypothetical game. It's more a case of just listing the players and their respective World Cup records and voting off that instead of their ability.. Is that right?

I get what you are trying to say but to adhere to the draft you have to go blindly by the WC performances. That's what it is, simply. You just imagine what the players did in the WC and forget their entire club and other international career. It's the actual performances, that counts. In terms of actual performances Cannavaro was flawless. So he gets a lot of credit for that regardless of what sort of ability he had otherwise.
 
Oh dear back to the Messi v Klose problem again... :rolleyes:

I was under the impression that under the terms of this draft, Klose will be lightyears ahead of Messi.

Otherwise it's just an all time draft minus Di Stefano & Best.
 
Oh dear back to the Messi v Klose problem again... :rolleyes:

I was under the impression that under the terms of this draft, Klose will be lightyears ahead of Messi.

Otherwise it's just an all time draft minus Di Stefano & Best.

Exactly. If you just start going by the whole career anyone who has played a minute at a world cup becomes eligible which includes 99% of what you would have in an all time draft.
 
I get what you are trying to say but to adhere to the draft you have to go blindly by the WC performances. That's what it is, simply. You just imagine what the players did in the WC and forget their entire club and other international career. It's the actual performances, that counts. In terms of actual performances Cannavaro was flawless. So he gets a lot of credit for that regardless of what sort of ability he had otherwise.


Of course but one can not ban people from picking crowd-pleasers to win over scan-voters. Just be there in the match-thread and talk down Rijkaard if you dislike the pick but there is no benefit of doing it here.
 
I get what you are trying to say but to adhere to the draft you have to go blindly by the WC performances. That's what it is, simply. You just imagine what the players did in the WC and forget their entire club and other international career. It's the actual performances, that counts. In terms of actual performances Cannavaro was flawless. So he gets a lot of credit for that regardless of what sort of ability he had otherwise.

Yeah, also some players perform in cups or bigger stages and some do not. I mean if it is not about just the WC performances then it is absurd that Messi has not been picked yet/
 
I don't really understand the problem. We judge most of the older players mainly because of their worldcup games, so why can't we do it with players we know more about? Has anyone seen for example Didi play for his club sides?
 
Of course but one can not ban people from picking crowd-pleasers to win over scan-voters. Just be there in the match-thread and talk down Rijkaard if you dislike the pick but there is no benefit of doing it here.

We cannot.

However 16 votes are going to come from inside the draft with a few who actually bother to read the question in the poll so it should not be that bad.

Anyway, this problem is always there in any form specific draft. That is why we always have a player considered at his prime to avoid any of this. It's not really a big deal and as long as most of us who are playing try to keep ourselves within the rules instead of completely trying to pick an irrelevant team it should be fine.
 
I don't really understand the problem. We judge most of the older players mainly because of their worldcup games, so why can't we do it with players we know more about? Has anyone seen for example Didi play for his club sides?

Good point
 
We cannot.

However 16 votes are going to come from inside the draft with a few who actually bother to read the question in the poll so it should not be that bad.

Anyway, this problem is always there in any form specific draft. That is why we always have a player considered at his prime to avoid any of this. It's not really a big deal and as long as most of us who are playing try to keep ourselves within the rules instead of completely trying to pick an irrelevant team it should be fine.


If anything you should be happy that they made a mistake in your eyes.
 
I don't really understand the problem. We judge most of the older players mainly because of their worldcup games, so why can't we do it with players we know more about? Has anyone seen for example Didi play for his club sides?


Nah its not a problem for old players.

But for new players Paceme will have seen Rijkaard at Milan and be influenced heavily by that, but is now learning that he doesn't carry much weight here.
 
'World cup prime' is a vague term really no? If we are judging purely on performance then some strange names may be thrown in as pretty average players (in terms of drafts) have had great tournaments.

That's the point, some otherwise average players have shown up at World Cups and performed very well at the highest level. For some it is the only time in their lifetime they got the chance and seized it. That's what we are looking out for, otherwise it's an all-time draft with different constraints.
 
If anything you should be happy that they made a mistake in your eyes.

Exactly. As I said, if someone picks Messi for example right now, he'd be losing votes from the ones playing and few from outside. So you are welcome to take that risk. However, I would prefer that people stick to WC performances so at the of it we see teams that represent of what we have seen in the WCs so far.
 
I don't think we can be too negative about Rijkaard. He has had a very average world cup but he should still go in the first 4 rounds.

I could list you ten players who did better in his position straight off the top of my head.
 
We cannot.

However 16 votes are going to come from inside the draft with a few who actually bother to read the question in the poll so it should not be that bad.

Anyway, this problem is always there in any form specific draft. That is why we always have a player considered at his prime to avoid any of this. It's not really a big deal and as long as most of us who are playing try to keep ourselves within the rules instead of completely trying to pick an irrelevant team it should be fine.

You assume all the votes will always vote. That's never been the case. Often only half, or just there about, vote in each game. The majority of the vote has generally been from outside the draft.
 
I don't really understand the problem. We judge most of the older players mainly because of their worldcup games, so why can't we do it with players we know more about? Has anyone seen for example Didi play for his club sides?

One problem regarding the old players. You were worried about having to build your side around Cruyff. What about Pele and players from his era and earlier, who played in a 3-2-5 formation. How will they cope playing in a 4-2-3-1?
 
Well excuse the pick, I obviously didn't fully understand the criteria. Anyone who saw my last draft will know I'm hardly in it for crowd pleasing :lol:

I know, I don't have an issue with it, I have an issue with people persisting in the error that performance and ability beyond World Cups has anything to do with it.
 
You assume all the votes will always vote. That's never been the case. Often only half, or just there about, vote in each game. The majority of the vote has generally been from outside the draft.

Let them be. For me I'd rather see everyone simply concentrate picking on WC legends and worry about votes later.
 
I might need to re-think my picks here if Cannavaro is getting placed ahead of Baresi. Guys from South Korea 2002 could be considered solid picks? E.g. The South Korean DM in 2002 is rated ahead of Rijkaard since his team reached the semi-final whilst Rijkaard did nothing at Italia 90?
 
I agree but top 64 is not much of a stretch considering the bonus you get for him being who he is.

He is nowhere near top 64. I listed about 80 tournament defining performances, be it great tournaments or outstanding influential performances in key games. Rijkaard was nowhre near that list. The most memorable thing he did was get himself sent off.

Not having a go or knocking paceme, he clearly hadn't wrapped his head around it.
 
I might need to re-think my picks here if Cannavaro is getting placed ahead of Baresi. Guys from South Korea 2002 could be considered solid picks? E.g. The South Korean DM in 2002 is rated ahead of Rijkaard since his team reached the semi-final whilst Rijkaard did nothing at Italia 90?


If we can pick referees, the one who sent Totti off to gift Korea the game certainly warrants selection.
 
I might need to re-think my picks here if Cannavaro is getting placed ahead of Baresi. Guys from South Korea 2002 could be considered solid picks?

Which guys? The Koreans? I could never tell one from the other so I couldn't tell. I understand a couple supposedly did very well but I don't trust FIFA with their approach to representation.

You are looking at an extreme though and BTW, as I said, you will have a hard time finding a better performance than Baresi's in the 94 WC Final. Immense, was heartbroken for the poor geezer.
 
One problem regarding the old players. You were worried about having to build your side around Cruyff. What about Pele and players from his era and earlier, who played in a 3-2-5 formation. How will they cope playing in a 4-2-3-1?
I don't think it's that complicated, we've seen what they can do on the pitch and use them in a position that suits their abilities. The formation doesn't really matter then, imo, you just need to explain why you think it'll work and convince the voters. Important for this draft is that you back it up with what they've shown in world cup matches and not argue that they've played that position for a club side at some point in their career.
 
I don't think it's that complicated, we've seen what they can do on the pitch and use them in a position that suits their abilities. The formation doesn't really matter then, imo, you just need to explain why you think it'll work and convince the voters. Important for this draft is that you back it up with what they've shown in world cup matches and not argue that they've played that position for a club side at some point in their career.

Actually, we won't have seen what they can do. At least not me and many others. I've not made a habit of watching old World Cup games, 90 minutes at a time. I'm not Brwned.

I agree that it shouldn't be complicated. But the way people are strictly judging players I thought they might see it that way as well.

Regarding the Baresi vs. Cannavaro bit. Baresi is clearly the stronger player. Also if you base it solely on World Cups. Cannavaro didn't just play in the 2006 WC's. Every WC they play in should count and then you average it out.
 
Actually, we won't have seen what they can do. At least not me and many others. I've not made a habit of watching old World Cup games, 90 minutes at a time. I'm not Brwned.

I agree that it shouldn't be complicated. But the way people are strictly judging players I thought they might see it that way as well.

Regarding the Baresi vs. Cannavaro bit. Baresi is clearly the stronger player. Also if you base it solely on World Cups. Cannavaro didn't just play in the 2006 WC's. Every WC they play in should count and then you average it out.

Agree with the last bit.
 
Actually, we won't have seen what they can do. At least not me and many others. I've not made a habit of watching old World Cup games, 90 minutes at a time. I'm not Brwned.

I agree that it shouldn't be complicated. But the way people are strictly judging players I thought they might see it that way as well.

Regarding the Baresi vs. Cannavaro bit. Baresi is clearly the stronger player. Also if you base it solely on World Cups. Cannavaro didn't just play in the 2006 WC's. Every WC they play in should count and then you average it out.


The rules say: these players are judged based on their WC prime, therefore Cannavaro 2006 should count and nothing else.

Otherwise you'd start having to argue Zidane had a dreadful 2002, Maradona didn't exactly cover himself in glory in 1994...
 
Which guys? The Koreans? I could never tell one from the other so I couldn't tell. I understand a couple supposedly did very well but I don't trust FIFA with their approach to representation.

You are looking at an extreme though and BTW, as I said, you will have a hard time finding a better performance than Baresi's in the 94 WC Final. Immense, was heartbroken for the poor geezer.

Yeah Baresi was immense in that final, I just assumed he'd still be a better pick than Cannavaro since they both had brilliant tournaments but Franco obviously is the superior player. Fabio didn't do anything of note in 2002. Baresi was stronger in 1990. Averages out?

And in fairness to paceme, i had Rijkaard in as a potential pick going by the logic that even though he (or his team mates) didn't do much in 1990, a Rijkaard at 70% or a Rijkaard knocked out in the groups is still better than most DM's.

Sorry to be a pain, just trying to clear up some uncertainty.
 
He is nowhere near top 64. I listed about 80 tournament defining performances, be it great tournaments or outstanding influential performances in key games. Rijkaard was nowhre near that list. The most memorable thing he did was get himself sent off.

Not having a go or knocking paceme, he clearly hadn't wrapped his head around it.


I mean with his added scan-voter factor of course, not just based on his performance.
 
Actually, we won't have seen what they can do. At least not me and many others. I've not made a habit of watching old World Cup games, 90 minutes at a time. I'm not Brwned.

I agree that it shouldn't be complicated. But the way people are strictly judging players I thought they might see it that way as well.

Regarding the Baresi vs. Cannavaro bit. Baresi is clearly the stronger player. Also if you base it solely on World Cups. Cannavaro didn't just play in the 2006 WC's. Every WC they play in should count and then you average it out.
It doesn't really need to be that perfect, it's a game after all. It should be fun. I don't mind if someone misjudges a player or talks about what he read about him and that it contradicts what the manager is trying to sell. I've learned about players through these draft games that I've never seen before. If the manager does a good job, then he deserves to win votes. I don't really see the problem.

I also agree with the Baresi vs Cannavaro bit, it's not really a good example for the 'Klose vs Messi' problem, because Baresi had absolutely amazing worldcup performances. I think the gap between him and Cannavaro should be way smaller in this draft than in a regular alltime draft though. Disagree with the 'average it out' part though. I don't think a single game should be seen as prime, but one standout tournament and 2 shit ones is clearly better than 3 decent tournaments.
 
Zico

Zico1.jpg
 
Pol 1. Maradona
Cal 1. Pele
Aldo 1. Garrincha
Theon 1. Beckenbauer 2. Zico
Rpitroda 1. Zidane 2. Masopust
Paceme 1. Platini 2. Rijkaard
Jayvin 1. Ronaldo 2. Cannavaro
Desert 1.Moore 2. Meazza
Annah 1. Didi 2. Iniesta
Crappy/Pippa 1. Fontaine 2. Krol
Fergus 1. Matthäus 2. Falcao
Balu/NM 1. Cruyff 2. Jairzinho
Anto 1. Puskas 2. Neeskens
Gio. 1. Eusebio 2. Figueroa
Cutch 1. Muller 2. Facchetti
TITO 1. Charlton 2. Baresi
 
It doesn't really need to be that perfect, it's a game after all. It should be fun. I don't mind if someone misjudges a player or talks about what he read about him and that it contradicts what the manager is trying to sell. I've learned about players through these draft games that I've never seen before. If the manager does a good job, then he deserves to win votes. I don't really see the problem.

I also agree with the Baresi vs Cannavaro bit, it's not really a good example for the 'Klose vs Messi' problem, because Baresi had absolutely amazing worldcup performances. I think the gap between him and Cannavaro should be way smaller in this draft than in a regular alltime draft though. Disagree with the 'average it out' part though. I don't think a single game should be seen as prime, but one standout tournament and 2 shit ones is clearly better than 3 decent tournaments.


So we're going by WC averages then? I'll keep that in mind to trash talk Zidane 2002 and Maradona 1994 if I come up against those sides. :)
 
No one has a clue what is definitively going on, so I'm just gonna play for fun really and try and create a cool side with a general focus on world cup performances.
 
So we're going by WC averages then? I'll keep that in mind to trash talk Zidane 2002 and Maradona 1994 if I come up against those sides. :)
Didn't I say the exact opposite? At least that's what I was trying to say :lol:. Maradona could have seen a red card in the first 5 minutes of every single world cup game in 82, 90 and 94 and he still would be the best player in the draft because of his performances in 86, at least that's my opinion.