DEFENSE__________________________SUBSTITUTES: 1) GK: Rinet Dasajev (USSR)_________12) GK: Ubaldo Filol (ARG) 2) RWB: Manuel Amoros (FRA)________13) RWB: José Leandro de Souza Ferreira (BRA) 3) CB: Franco Baresi (ITA)________________________14) CB: Gaetano Scirea (ITA) 4) CB: Daniel Passarella (ARG)_____________________15) CB: Giuseppe Bergomi (ITA) 6) LWB: Leovegildo Lins da Gama Júnior (BRA)_______17) LWB: Andreas Brehme (GER) MIDFIELD 5) DM: Lothar Matthäus (GER)________16) DM: Frank Rijkaard (HOL) 8) CM: Paulo Roberto Falcão (BRA)_____19) CM: Jean Tigana (FRA) 11) AM: Michel Platini (FRA)___________22) AM: Sócrates (BRA) 7) AM: Zico (BRA)___________________18) AM: Michael Laudrup (DEN) FORWARD 10) Diego Maradona (ARG)_____________21) Ruud Gullit (HOL) 9) ST: Marco Van Basten (HOL)_________20) ST: Careca (BRA) Peter Schmeichel peaked in early 1990s, but I'd have him as the third goalie on my '80s squad. Here's the formation: ___________________________Dasajev_______________________ _______________Baresi ________________Passarella(C)___________ ____Amoros______________________________________Júnior___ ______________________Matthäus__________________________ ________________________________Falcão__________________ ___________________________Platini_______________________ ______________Zico_______________________Maradona________ __________________________Van Basten_____________________ After hours of thinking and researching, this is my ultimate '80s All-Decade squad. Can't think of a better team than that, really. What do you guys think?
Here is mine, posted early in this thread, which I think gives yours a good run for its money: Shilton Scirea-Passarella-Brehme Rikjaard-Falcao Socrates-Platini-Maradona Zico-Rossi
Was Schilton that good? Not sure I would bench Baresi for Scirea, mate. Baresi seems to be higher ranked in "all-time greatest defenders" lists much more often than Scirea (including the one compiled by World Soccer). I'm also pretty convinced that Júnior is superior to Brehme (although it makes sense, since you do need a more defensive player with your formation). And Rijkaard and Matthaus are pretty much equivalent. My biggest problem with your team is the inclusion of Rossi in the place of Van Basten. I believe very few people around the world would agree with that. I mean, Paolo Rossi is probably not even a Top 25 all time greatest striker (the only time he really caught the attention of the world was during the 1982 WC when he played like he'd never done before or after), wehereas Van Basten is often seen in the Top 5. Don't you think that, with your formation, your squad still lacks another more defensive player, though? You only seem to have 4 of such players... Still, a very strong and interesting team, no doubt. But I think mine is a bit more balanced between attack and defense.
Good observations, here are my responses to each of your points: -Shilton was very good, but I will concede Dasaev was better. What about Pfaff? -Scirea and Baresi are pretty similar, Baresi had perhaps the better club career but Scirea won the WC (where he actually played) in 82 and came in fourth in 78. Baresi in fact only has one WC (90) and one Euro (88) of note. It must be said that the AC Milan players are, in my opinion, sometimes ranked a bit too highly overall (see Van Basten below). -I agree Junior is classier than Brehme, but as you mentioned, I need someone with more of a physical defensive presence in my team, given all the attacking options. -Rikjaard is a better defensive option than Matthaus in my opinion, the German at his prime was an attacking midfielder whereas FR was a natural defensive mid with great ball skills. -Rossi had an excellent WC78 as well. But to me his WC82 is enough to at least put him in the discussion against Van Basten. I have mentioned in other threads how I feel about VB, he was truly a peerless forward but often came up short in crucial moments, particularly in cup competitions (Euro88 being the notable exception). -It's true your formation is more balanced, I tried to incorporate some of my favorite players in the lineup. Didn't have the heart to exclude the Doctor or Falcao, so had to make some compromises.
- Pfaff was very good too, wasn't he? I confess his name didn't even come to mind. Still, as you said, I think Dasaev excells all of them, really. I'd put Pfaff as my third goalie, behind Filol, and Schilton would have to be the fourth option. Schmeichel would make it onto a '90s squad. - I agree that, although Baresi receives much more recognition worldwide than Scirea, it doesn't mean he was the better player. I'd still go with Baresi on this one though. But I reckon it wouldn't be absurd to have Scirea as the starting CB. - Regarding Junior, I wouldn't make a formation that would sacrifice him. Especially a formation that would unbalance my team. The man was fantastic. But that's just me. Since you sacrificed him for Sócrates, you have a point, although I think you made your squad way too offensive, with 6 players predominantly attackers (I'm afraid I had to put him on the bench, there's simply no space). - I also agree that when it came down to being purely defensive, Rijkaard > Matthaus. On the other hand, it was Matthaus that was mentioned by Maradona as his greatest rival, wasn't it? Although Matthaus was more complete than Rijkaard (he was just as good defensively and offensively), you also have a point there. I think Mattahaus was more of a CM than a DM (in that case, he would have ot compete for the spot with Falcao and Tigana). What I had in mind, though, was that my squad would be similar to Brazil 1982, when Falcao and Cerezo (who was also a CM) had to switch their roles on the pitch, since none of them were purely defensive. Falcao and Matthaus would do the same. I just couldn't compromise Matthaus... the man was a machine, extremely useful player. But yes, Rijkaard + Falcao would make more sense in terms of using each player's full potentials in their respective positions. - Regarding Rossi. You seem to be focusing on WCs performances more than the players' overall careers. I think our main disagreement will remain in that position. Although Rossi did better than Van Basten in WCs and generally in main international competitions, I think there's absolutely no way we can compare both players' quality. I respect what you think, but I truly believe Rossi was miles behind Van Basten as a player. I'd even rank Hugo Sanchez, Careca, Gary Lineker and Klinnsman higher than Paolo Rossi, to be honest. But I agree that it depends on what you're focusing on. My focus doesn't stand solely on WC performances. I prefer to analyze the players' full career. - As for the formation. I preferred to go for the classical and more traditional formation with 4 defenders. I just think it's not only easier to work, but also more effective and doesn't leave room for fragility. It just makes it more balanced, as you agreed to. Summarizing it: the only thing I'd be willing to concede, would be to switch Matthaus for Rijkaard. MAYBE, I could also change the sub RB (Leandro for Gerets) and the sub striker Careca for someone else. But those are minor changes and I'm not sure I'd make them. Apart from that, I would really not change anything else on my squad. By the way, who would be your subs?
We'll have to each stick to our choices regarding centerforward. Van Basten is better for a league competition, but for a cup tournament I would take Rossi. I would rate Van Basten's Euro88 as close to Rossi's WC82 (small advantage to Rossi) but a big advantage to Rossi between his WC78 and Van Basten's WC90. My subs would be: Dasaev Amoros-Baresi-Passarella-Junior Tigana-Cerezo-Schuster-Francescoli Gullit-Van Basten Honorable mention: Ruggieri, Cabrini, Matthaus, Boniek, Sanchez
very good line up with a rare classic 3 5 2 .. with 3 super choices of DF for that fomation - really aa all of them could be a "libero" in turn. Plus 3 good MF in selection: however I would put Maradona in middle (since Platini would be more comfortable to roam into the box from left side (with right foot to shoot) whereas Maradona is a lefty. Believe me Maradona would still be great on the left, but it'd be like you force him as "supporting role and cut him off from shooting) ( I am surprised to see a lot of you put Maradona on the left? obviously you guys do not play football and hardly be a coach LOL) ONE FAULTY in this great XI: Rossi is a weakest link in the whole "possession MF" team you got there. Either Van Basten , Carreca or Rummnigge would be superb double addition to your already great team.
Thanks for the praise. Yeah, I felt that putting Maradona on the left was somewhat insulting to the greatest player of all time , he indeed should be the central fulcrum running the play on any team. However, because of his greater explosiveness, I thought that he would play the flank better than Platini, but in reality it would be a dynamic formation with the two playmakers exchanging positions often. I'm not sure though what you mean with your sentence in red letters, Maradona often played on the left side, particularly at Boca Juniors. I chose Rossi precisely because on a possession heavy team such as mine, there is no additional need for a super skillful striker but rather someone who can just be clinical.
I'd put Maradona in the forward position, to be honest (or I'd use my 4-2-3-1 formation and place him beside Zico and have Platini centered). The way I see it, Platini should be in the centre simply due to the fact that he was the best passer out of the three - he'd be distributing the ball to either sides of the pitch from behind. Zico's quality is sort of in the middle between Platini and Maradona: he was a better passer than Maradona and was individually more skilfull and faster than Platini. And Maradona was the most individualistic player out of the three, but as great as he was, he was never regarded as an outstanding passer, let's be honest here. I've even seen discussions about Zico and Platini being much more useful players to the team as a whole than Maradona, although we all know he could win a game by himself and be more decisive than the other two. Due to his individual skills, Maradoina is more likely to play as a forward (second sriker on the left side) in this particular team (that already has a great midfield) than Zico or Platini, who were more purely midfielders. In the case of Pipiolo' squad, it would be even harder to have Maradona centered in the middle because he has an extra outstanding passer and pure attacking midfielder, which is Sócrates, who pretty much emulates Platini in many ways. There's no space for Maradona there, really. Anyway, take a look at my 4-2-3-1 formation, I have Zico and Maradona more advanced (none of them being actual forwards): ____________________________________Dasajev_______________________ _______________Baresi ________________Passarella(C)___________ ____Amoros______________________________________Júnior___ ______________________Rijkaard__________________________ ________________________________Falcão__________________ ___________________________Platini_______________________ ______________Zico_______________________Maradona________ __________________________Van Basten_____________________
I think you are severly underrating Maradona's passing ability, no player is considered one of the top two of all time without the essential ability to pass the ball precisely. Don't forget for all the talk about Platini's and Zico's passing, which is indeed outstanding, it is Maradona who gave the greatest assist in WC history, leading to the third goal against Germany in the final (all the more impressive in the context that he only had five minutes since Germany's equalized to finish off the match before overtime).
I'm not saying Maradona can't pass the ball, man. I wouldn't dare to say something like that. I'm just stating that his passing abilitiy is not the main thing that he is seen as one of the greatest players for. That's all. And in such a team, I think you'd have to put the players in the best possible positions that suit their best qualities. I fail to see what's wrong with that. I wouldn't place Platini as a forward because I know he would do much better coming with the ball from behind. It would't make sense to sacrifice his best quality that made him widely acclaimed for. Obviously, when making such a team, we'd have to sacrifice a little bit of each player because the team is simply too good and they could only play together that way. At least that's how I see it. I'd put Zico and Platini (especially the latter) as midfielders before I put Maradona, who would work as an exceptional play-making second striker. Or I would use my formation By the way, the greatest assist ever in a WC was by Pele to C.A. Torres in 1970.
Remember, I did put Maradona on the left and Platini centrally in order to sacrifice less so that they could play together, although they could certainly switch roles throughout moments during a match. I know you weren't saying Maradona cannot pass the ball, but to me he is a 10 in that department, just as Platini and Zico are, though it's true Platini could make passes from a greater distance. The Pele to Carlos Alberto pass is one of the great moments in WC history, but more for the collective passing exhibition that lead to it, as well as Carlos Alberto's grounded beauty of a shot. Maradona's to Burruchaga is a piece of fantastic cunning as it paralyzed the defenders, making a pass like that while in the air is also a display of utmost technique under pressure.
That's too debatable ... Like I also debate in other post! Playini ONLY looked great in the big teams surrounding with many great passers like himself (from Juve to France 80's). I am NOT sure if he will look as great and as comfortable if playing for teams like Unidese/Folamengo (of Zico) or Napoli/Argentina 80's (of Maradona). Even we ignored that FACT, Platini was best the same as both Zico and Maradona in passing - Hint Maraodna Zico were slightly better in short passing while Platini was a bit better in long passing - so EQUAL in general. Now back to your formation, if putting Maradona in middle instead of Platini youd' automatically gain 1.3 of a goal winning (if not saying half won) - Yes you;re right that maradona was more "individualistic" than Platini and Zico but hey he was so great at that- nothing wrong with it! I'd rather let him running with the ball than passing to another who might screw it up (like watching Argentina or Napoli in his times!!!!)
I have an exercise for Pipiolo and JGGott. Could you both make an 80s Best XI with a formation actually played by then? I mean, 4-2-3-1 (with three playmakers) and 3-2-3-1-1 weren't systems used in the 80s.
With all due respect, are you actually calling Flamengo not a big team and comparing it to Udinese and Napoli??? Because that's the impression I got. Flamengo is one of the biggest, most important and historical Brazilian clubs ever with the BIGGEST crowd of supporters in the world. Some of the greatest legends in football (including Zico) played and peaked in that club. That is so now and it was even more so in the 80s and prior, when there wasn't such a gap between European and South American leagues and teams, and there wasn't so much interchange between the 2 continents, so the best Brazilian and Argentinian players stayed in their countries. Early 1980s Flamengo, for example, was widely regarded as the best team in the world in those days and, indeed, they beat Liverpool (3-0) and were Club World Champions in 1981, with one of Zico's greatest performances ever on the pitch. That Flamengo team still counted with the likes of Leandro, Mozer, Júnior, Adílio, Andrade and Nunes. A great deal of Brazil 1982 came from Flamengo. In fact, the only player in Brazil 1982 (one of the greatest squads ever assembled) that didn't play in Brazil was Falcao, who had been recently transferred to A.S. Roma, a transaction very uncommon in those days. I'm sorry, I know it doesn't have much to do with the discussion on this thread, but I couldn't remain quiet after you saying something like that. It was just too absurd for me. Now, regarding Zico going to a smaller clubs like Udinese, Maradona going to Napoli and even Socrates to Fiorentina, I think it shows a little bit of what Europeans are quite oftenly accused for, especially in previous decades: they tend to underrate South American players and teams and very often regret it. It's true many times European clubs didn't show interest on S. American craques because they preferred more tactically disciplined players, even though they were not as technical or skillful (generally speaking, obviously). I mean, the fact that 2 of the greatest players of all time were not in the interest of of the biggest European clubs shows it all. Well, of course in those days, it wasn't as easy to exchange information and communicate, so that was a factor too. I've seen interviews were many people responsible for the biggest teams in Europe were not simply not aware of the quality of such players. Still, the best years in the history of Udinese and Napoli were when those players were playing for them. Anyway, I didn't say Maradona wasn't great, even though he was more of an individual player and the other two were more team players (which is widely recognized fact). If you read what I wrote in previous comments, you'll understand why I wouldn't put him centralized in the midfield in such a team.
The systems used in South America and Europe were very different, because of the difference between the characteristics of the players and football ideologies in the 2 continents. The formation that I used was the same one used in Brazil 1982 (4-2-3-1): Leandro-Luizinho-Oscar-Junior Cerezo-Falcao Zico-Socrates-Eder Serginho So, in fact, there were other formations in the 80s that started to be used with Brazil 82, but even for a non-European style of play, it was pretty groundbreaking and offensive for the time and many people were shocked by it. But of course, with such players, you had to be offensive and that's what made that squad being remembered for playing so beautifully and so ahead of its time.
LOL I had Baresi, but not Gullit. Gullit was a sub for Maradona. And I had Matthaus instead of Rijkaard, but I agreed the latter would be the better option as a fullly defensive midfielder. Dasaev Amoros-Baresi(Scirea)-Passarella-Júnior Matthaus(Rijkaard)-Falcão-Platini-Zico Maradona-Van Basten Still, I prefer a 4-2-3-1: Dasaev Amoros-Baresi-Passarella-Júnior Rijkaard-Falcão Zico-Platini-Maradona Van Basten
I really don't know why you keep saying that. You continue to ignore that Platini had a carreer before joining Juve in 1982... If what you said was true then his level of play would have raised when he left Nancy (low/mid-table French team) to join Saint Etienne (top French team) and when he left Saint Etienne to join Juve (top European team), but it didn't happen. For example you could have expected his gpg ratio to have increased, but it did not, and in fact it was the opposite : it was 0.6 in Nancy, 0.56 in St Etienne and 0.46 in Juve, all of this while playing for a significant time in a deeper position than both Maradona and Zico. Same for France : I've already explained you that the NT had nothing special before 1982 and was even quite average in the mid to late 70's. In any case it was not superior to Maradona's Argentina 80. Despite that Platini's gpg between 1975 and 1982 was 0.58... as a midfielder again. After 1982 -when France was indeed a great team with the magic square surrounding him- his gpg ratio was... 0.59. Again, you could have expected his level of play to have increased, but it did not. What does all this show ? Platini was great regardless the level of his team, being low or average (Nancy/mid to late 70's France), good (early 80's France / St Etienne) or great (Juve /82-86 French team). Platini was not a Cristiano Ronaldo kind of player whose numbers immediatly drop when he plays for a lesser team (Portugal NT). Nothing proves he would have done worse than Maradona or Zico had he played for Napoli or Udinese, or that the Argentinian or the Brazilian would have done better than him for Juve. In fact, everything in Platini's carreer suggest he would have done just as well.
I agree, I think Platini, Zico and Maradona were all players of the same level, with Maradona being the greatest of the three after what he did in the 1986 WC (and for that reason only). It's widely acknowledged that if Zico had won a World Cup, his status would be even more legendary, equalling Maradona. Don't know if I agree with it, but it makes no difference really. It's just speculation. Anyway, Zico was unquestionably the best player in the world from 1981-1983, Platini was unquestionably the best in the world from 1984-1985 and Maradona was unquestionably the best in the world from 1986 to late 1980s. The three of them were the greatest midfielders of the 80s.
Maradona also played for a good NT with team-mates getting included in team of tournaments. OPTA has 4 Argentinians in top 10 of 1986 World Cup. If anyone of the three played with good team-mates it was Zico. His ratio for NT is phenomenal with 52 goals in 72 games. However, this also includes 11 penalty goals whereas Maradona and Platini each scored three PK-goals for their NT.
Other than Caniggia for WC90, Maradona didn't have any great players as team mates with Argentina comparable to Platini with France or Zico with Brazil. Who do you think would be similar to Giresse, Tigana, Amoros, Tressor, Ghengini and Fernandez or Socrates, Falcao, Toninho Cerezo, Junior and Careca?