Agreed
Fantasy Tournament: World Cup All-Time All-Stars
- Thread starter Polaroid
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Agreed
You can tell the difference between me upholding the rules and you being sore you missed out!
I'm sad about missing out but I would have been okay had he been used properly.
Cruyff will be doing the same thing as a AM as he would a false 9, it's the players around him that would be playing differently. Same really can't be said of Thuram at RB or CB.
Balu made the right choice in the end to play him in a set up as close to the one he had his peak WC at, being a first pick you really should get the best out of them.
So Pol hasn't been online in 32 odd hours? 
He was articulating the hypothetical scenario in which he hadn't and that then there would be no argument. Ergo, his point was he had, since he is arguing!
I explained before how Cruyff went about things in 74. He was a false 9 just because you need to call it something. With total football you will struggle to pin down a position. With forwards you also have an issue regarding the changes in the way tactics have evolved so an inside forward could be a centreforward or #10/AM as clearly no one is going to play five upfront.
That's why I mentioned earlier what I wouldn't buy is an inside forward turning into an out and out winger, because there was a position assigned to that back then and if that player wasn't playing there he simply wasn't, even if he is quick and dribbles, I don't care. Defences have changed over time too, but there's always been an outer-most defender whose primary defensive task is to take care of the winger. That's what Thuram played in 98, not CB.
So Pol hasn't been online in 32 odd hours?
Which means if Gio hadn't been moving yesterday we may well be getting back to him for a second time by now!
Two hours still to go though.
feck sakes Pol. Imagine slowing things up like this - what a cnut.
You don't see the problem when the entire draft rules are about the undefined definition of "peak"?
The entire draft will be about every single manager giving their definition of peak and every manager will have picked differently depending on their definitions of the word peaks. Then there will be an argument to which definition is more correct.
Is it peak to have one 10/10 game and never playing again. Can we consider this players having the highest peak in WC history? Or is 1 game not enough? If it isn't are two games enough three?
WC peak = best world cup, and it follows it would be whatever his position was in that World Cup.
Is one game enough? Two? Three? That's up to the voters really, you can only get that scientific in your definitions. If Keane had only played that game in Turin in 99 and been injured or suspended for the rest I would consider it his CL peak. Of course, I would know that was not a one-off flukey performance. If someone has a one off flukey performance and their entire body of work doesn't stack up to it then I would dimiss it as just that: a fluke to be overlooked. Dado Prso, for instance.
The fact is that so far none of the players picked are in that category, everyone seems to be very accutely aware of what constitutes peak performance without the need for a restrictive definition.
I don't think there are many players available who peaked in 2 different positions, so I don't see the problem actually? If someone plays Beckenbauer in midfield, fair enough, I don't mind, I know how he played there in 66 and 70. I don't think about 74 then and don't really care what year is considered his peak.
Thuramgate could be really interesting, if he ends up playing his Parma position which he actually never played at the worldcup at all
(but which is imo closer to his role in 98 than in 06).I think just about all the players have been covered that are controversial, unless someone springs a surprise on us.
Pol has one hour left.
Messi will be picked at some point Ii think
And then shit will truely hit the fan.
Messi had a very solid world-cup. He displayed world-class technique, passing, vision but lacked the final balls. I am almost certain someone will pick him and he is will be a sound pick to have on the bench. Who more than Maradona displayed that sort of close-control and ability to keep the ball from that role.
Of course compared to his usual self he was very bad but that doesn't mean he was bad compared to others.
Of course compared to his usual self he was very bad but that doesn't mean he was bad compared to others.
There is a problem though, whoever picks Messi will be viewed as unsporting. Some posters who vote on games just look at the line-ups and if they see Messi, they'll vote for that team.
No manager should be at fault for idiotic voters, imo. And I think some of you are really harsh on the voters, are they really that bad and have often influenced games in a way that didn't make sense at all? In the 4 or 5 draft games I followed on here, it never seemed that way to me.
Yeah, having Rijkaard will land that team a valuable amount of free-votes.
The majority will put their effort in - but there will always be an important bunch voting by only seeing the line-ups and rules without researching whether Rijkaard was good/bad etc.
Yes, but a few will also not rate him, so it becomes a bad pick to some and a good pick to others, don't really think that's an advantage instead of picking less controversial. It's definitely nothing I'd hold against the manager or something I'd call unsporting.
He was above average at best in that world cup, infact if you compare him to to 'Messi' standards, he was below par. Anyway who picks him would be mostly doing so for free votes or at least to not get penalized for any other weak player.
Of course Rijkaard was picked very early. But if he last picked Rijkaard it would just have been a bonus that some would consider Rijkaard a first round pick. So there can be cases where you get free votes without having to "pay for it".
Messi was Messi without his usual excellent finishing touches. His shots/crosses/last through-balls just didn't work out the way they should. His general passing, technique, dribbling, vision, balance and all that stuff was world-class.
I can see Messi being an amazing pick if that sort of player is in your interest. I would have no problems voting for Messi if I thought the tactic/situation was right for him.
Will he score you the Messi average of +1 goals per match? No. Will he assist pretty much every match? No.
The rest was pretty much the same.
Whoever has @Cal? 's pick be ready. 18 or so minutes to go.
Nah everyone will rate Rijkaard, what he says is correct.
Most voters wont research into whether Rijkaard had a good World Cup or not
Cal? is up!
All true, and what I was getting at earlier when we first started discussing this.
Messi was still the same world class player with his same abilities and that came through in the games, I remember him being triple marked at times and still pulling off his amazing dribbles.
Cal picks Wolfgang Overath
And that's a hat trick of World Cup Golden Balls!
Pol 1. Maradona 2. P Maldini 3. Breitner
Cal 1. Pele 2. Sándor Kocsis 3. Gerson 4. Laurent Blanc 5. Overath
Aldo 1. Garrincha 2. Romario 3. Scirea 4. Gentile 5. Kempes
Theon 1. Beckenbauer 2. Zico 3. Baggio 4. Kohler
Rpitroda 1. Zidane 2. Masopust 3. Varela 4. Desailly
Paceme 1. Platini 2. Rijkaard 3. Djalma Santos 4. Thuram
Jayvin 1. Ronaldo 2. Cannavaro 3. Rivaldo 4. Brehme
Desert 1.Moore 2. Meazza 3. Passarella 4. Busquets Banquets
Annah 1. Didi 2. Iniesta 3. Ronaldinho 4. Stoichkov
Crappy/Pippa 1. Fontaine 2. Krol 3. Kopa 4. Vogts
Fergus 1. Matthäus 2. Falcao 3. Rivelino 4. Nilton Santos
Balu/NM 1. Cruyff 2. Jairzinho 3. Carlos Alberto 4. Davids
Anto 1. Puskas 2. Neeskens 3. Bozsik 4. Czibor
Gio. 1. Eusebio 2. Figueroa 3. Laudrup 4. Xavi
Cutch 1. Muller 2. Facchetti 3. Cafu 4. Santamaria
TITO 1. Charlton 2. Baresi 3. Zanetti 4. Schnellinger
Cal 1. Pele 2. Sándor Kocsis 3. Gerson 4. Laurent Blanc 5. Overath
Aldo 1. Garrincha 2. Romario 3. Scirea 4. Gentile 5. Kempes
Theon 1. Beckenbauer 2. Zico 3. Baggio 4. Kohler
Rpitroda 1. Zidane 2. Masopust 3. Varela 4. Desailly
Paceme 1. Platini 2. Rijkaard 3. Djalma Santos 4. Thuram
Jayvin 1. Ronaldo 2. Cannavaro 3. Rivaldo 4. Brehme
Desert 1.Moore 2. Meazza 3. Passarella 4. Busquets Banquets
Annah 1. Didi 2. Iniesta 3. Ronaldinho 4. Stoichkov
Crappy/Pippa 1. Fontaine 2. Krol 3. Kopa 4. Vogts
Fergus 1. Matthäus 2. Falcao 3. Rivelino 4. Nilton Santos
Balu/NM 1. Cruyff 2. Jairzinho 3. Carlos Alberto 4. Davids
Anto 1. Puskas 2. Neeskens 3. Bozsik 4. Czibor
Gio. 1. Eusebio 2. Figueroa 3. Laudrup 4. Xavi
Cutch 1. Muller 2. Facchetti 3. Cafu 4. Santamaria
TITO 1. Charlton 2. Baresi 3. Zanetti 4. Schnellinger
We're really skipping Pol?
Standard rules, mate. 8 hours were over.
Moreover he hasn't been online since 34 odd hours so I'm not sure how waiting a bit more would have helped.
Aldo PMed me to post Cal's pick. It is on him. Though I do think there is no point to 8 hour time limit if you are not going to follow it. Might as well remove it all together
Hmm, fair enough, 34 hours is really a long time. Just hurts his team so much, if we rush through now.
I know. I hope none of his targets get picked before he returns.
Hmm I'm gonna wait for Pol a bit longer
I lost a final because an Arse fan was upset I said in another thread that Ramsey should stop whinging about Shawcross and get on with playing for Wales. He just went into the gamethread and placed the tie-breaking vote with two minutes to go. I have loads of other examples, but that one takes the biscuit.
fecking hell. That's incredibly harsh.
This, I have no problem someone picking him when the alternatives played worse. It would be unsporting if the manager started mouthing off about having the best player in the world and such crap but if he is just portrayed accurately I don't see an issue.
I have no intention of picking him though. I could quite easily list 16 players better than him either at #10 or upfront.
And you enjoy telling that story almost as much as you would have enjoyed winning the final
.What are the odds it bites you in the ass?
It's a bit shit but it's not like there was a sudden burst of activity, his turn could have been last night under normal conditions and one day later we would still be waiting.
Fair enough though, and your call to take your time. It follows if he comes on he should ask you your picks first and avoid them.