Least Replaceable

[tpmazembe]

Player injuries and unavailability have shaped many a WC. Sometimes injuries directly affect the fortunes of teams, and other times the teams are able to compensate.

For the NTs of your choice, please indicate a) who they can least afford to lose on the eve of the upcoming WC and why, and b) how far they can go with and without him

Don't just indicate who you believe is the best player on the squad. Depending on your team composition, sometimes the loss of the best player can be overcome. When Brasil lost Pele in the second game of WC ’62, they were able to count on Garrincha to take them home. When they lost Pele in ’66, Garrincha was a shell of his former self, and the young guns (Jairzinho, Tostao), could not step up to that particular challenge.

Spain with DiStefano injured in build-up to WC ‘62
France with Zidane injured in build-up to WC ‘02, etc....the list is long.

More than likely someone is going to miss out on this upcoming cup as well.

So, indicate whose last minute absence is most detrimental to their NT’s chances in Germany.

[tpmazembe]

Germany – Ballack. Although Diesler could play a reasonable facsimile, there would be a leadership vacuum for what is a new side still coming together. I think the physcological blow of losing him would cause major harm.

With him: could win it at home
Without him: no further than quarter finals

Brasil – A tough one here. Ronaldo could be replaced with Adriano. If CAP chooses to stay with two goal scoring strikers, Oliveira partnered with either, though less potent, still gives them a strike force capable of winning. If either Gaucho or Kaka go down, well Juninho or Alex can move in. I thought about Emerson, but G.Silva won the WC last time. All the CBs available are about the same level (some on BS would argue that Roque’s injury would strengthen the squad). The FBs don’t decide games anymore, but bring great experience. However, if one of them went down, there is enough senior leadership on the team to continue strong. Dida's back-up is a WC winning caliber keeper.

By default then, it’s ZeRoberto. The least heralded of the players from midfield and forward, but plays CAP’s system to perfection. Able to run all game, support RC, and move the ball from deep in midfield to the forwards. Though his absence most weakens the team, they still would be contenders for the title.

With him: strong contenders for title
Without him: can make finals

Italy – Pirlo. Without him they become too Totti dependent. Totti’s role could be undertaken by Cassano or Del Piero, with a semblance of continuity (though missing his spark). My second choice here was Nesta, as I don’t find the Azzuri particularly deep at CB these days. However, Pirlo’s deep playmaking gives Italy a different wrinkle.

With him: could make finals
Without him: won’t pass the semis

Argentina – Riquelme. Pekerman seems to have decided that an enganche of Riquelme’s type will conduct the team. If Riquelme goes down, they’d have to hope that a healthy Aimar could step in. He hasn’t played conductor in quite a bit of time. D’Allessandro isn’t ready for the burden in my estimation. Gallardo?

With him: could make the finals
Without him: qtrs

England – Rooney. Takes England from a solid team, to a team that can beat you on one play. Lampard is money, but could be replaced by Gerrard (or vice-versa). They are deep at CB. Most of their GK approximate each other in terms of overall quality IMV, so a loss of the starter is not as much of a blow.

With him: could make finals
Without him: ends at qtrs, again

[argentine soccer fan]

Great topic. Let me try a few:

Mexico: Rafa Marquez.
They need his leadership and his ability to defend and start play, and also his maturity. I trust he learned from his untimely exit last time and he will not be a hothead.

With him: Mexico can make quarterfinals and who knows? Maybe surprise us all beyond that.
Without him: I see another bitter second round exit.


USA: Casey Keller.
Keller can be inconsistent, but if he gets hot, he is hard to score against. The US will need the veteran goalkeeper to play as big as Friedel did in 02.

With him: If he gets hot, they can possibly match their quarterfinal finish.
Without him: good luck getting past the first round.


Colombia: Ivan Cordoba
If Colombia makes it to Germany, they will be a tough team to beat because of their defense. And Cordoba, with his marking ability, speed and athleticism is key to that defense.

With him: A quarterfinal berth wouldn't surprise me.
Without him: Forget it. I don't think they even qualify out of South America.


Iran: Karimi
I am not just picking their most popular player. I have watched Iran in Asian matches and they are a very interesting team. They have toughness, speed and skilled players. But they will allow some goals, so they will need to score to do well. To keep up, they will need a creative force like Karimi.

With him: I can see them advancing.
Without him: They will be entertaining, and go home early.


Argentina: tp is right about Riquelme, but I have another one. Javier Mascherano. Key pressuring in front of the defense and to ensure posession in midfield.

With him: We can upset Brazil
Without him: I don't see us doing it. We better hope Brazil gets upset by someone else.

[DerMongerer]

Germany – Ballack. Although Diesler could play a reasonable facsimile, there would be a leadership vacuum for what is a new side still coming together. I think the physcological blow of losing him would cause major harm.

With him: could win it at home
Without him: no further than quarter finals

Brasil – A tough one here. Ronaldo could be replaced with Adriano. If CAP chooses to stay with two goal scoring strikers, Oliveira partnered with either, though less potent, still gives them a strike force capable of winning. If either Gaucho or Kaka go down, well Juninho or Alex can move in. I thought about Emerson, but G.Silva won the WC last time. All the CBs available are about the same level (some on BS would argue that Roque’s injury would strengthen the squad). The FBs don’t decide games anymore, but bring great experience. However, if one of them went down, there is enough senior leadership on the team to continue strong. Dida's back-up is a WC winning caliber keeper.

By default then, it’s ZeRoberto. The least heralded of the players from midfield and forward, but plays CAP’s system to perfection. Able to run all game, support RC, and move the ball from deep in midfield to the forwards. Though his absence most weakens the team, they still would be contenders for the title.

With him: strong contenders for title
Without him: can make finals

Italy – Pirlo. Without him they become too Totti dependent. Totti’s role could be undertaken by Cassano or Del Piero, with a semblance of continuity (though missing his spark). My second choice here was Nesta, as I don’t find the Azzuri particularly deep at CB these days. However, Pirlo’s deep playmaking gives Italy a different wrinkle.

With him: could make finals
Without him: won’t pass the semis

Argentina – Riquelme. Pekerman seems to have decided that an enganche of Riquelme’s type will conduct the team. If Riquelme goes down, they’d have to hope that a healthy Aimar could step in. He hasn’t played conductor in quite a bit of time. D’Allessandro isn’t ready for the burden in my estimation. Gallardo?

With him: could make the finals
Without him: qtrs

England – Rooney. Takes England from a solid team, to a team that can beat you on one play. Lampard is money, but could be replaced by Gerrard (or vice-versa). They are deep at CB. Most of their GK approximate each other in terms of overall quality IMV, so a loss of the starter is not as much of a blow.

With him: could make finals
Without him: ends at qtrs, again

I'd have to say from the two matches Brazil and Argentina played this year, there are two players both missed sorely in their loses and I think are both sides "X" factors, and cannot afford to be lost at any cost.

Brazil: I'd have to disagree with you about the centre-backs being at the same level. I think Lucio is on a different level compared to the rest of Brazil's CB's. I know most Europeans hardly give Brazilian defenders credit, but he's invaluable and irreplacable to Brazil. Look at him in the C.Cup finals vs. Argentina. I don't think Brazil will win the WC without him on the field. His physical no-nonsense attitude was sorely missed in Buenos Aires compared to the cavalier-ness of Roque Jr. He's also great at bringing the ball up-field and rarely loses it (well except for that "England incident) :eek:

Argentina: Yes Riquelme gets a lot of credit, but without Mascherano his effectiveness is reduced greatly. Mascherano may not be recognized as Argentina's best player, but he's the one player they cannot afford to lose. His presence was sorely missed in the C.Cup finals when Brazil pretty much waltzed up and down the midfield at will, not to mentioned put a pounding on Riquelme. At the Copa finals, he'd pretty much reduced Alex to a spectator. This guy is like a one-man buzzsaw to opposing midfields. He almost always wins the ball away without ever getting carded. I don't think Argentina can beat Brazil should they meet without Mascherano.

[Kaushik]

I'd have to say from the two matches Brazil and Argentina played this year, there are two players both missed sorely in their loses and I think are both sides "X" factors, and cannot afford to be lost at any cost.

Brazil: I'd have to disagree with you about the centre-backs being at the same level. I think Lucio is on a different level compared to the rest of Brazil's CB's. I know most Europeans hardly give Brazilian defenders credit, but he's invaluable and irreplacable to Brazil. Look at him in the C.Cup finals vs. Argentina. I don't think Brazil will win the WC without him on the field. His physical no-nonsense attitude was sorely missed in Buenos Aires compared to the cavalier-ness of Roque Jr. He's also great at bringing the ball up-field and rarely loses it (well except for that "England incident) :eek:

Argentina: Yes Riquelme gets a lot of credit, but without Mascherano his effectiveness is reduced greatly. Mascherano may not be recognized as Argentina's best player, but he's the one player they cannot afford to lose. His presence was sorely missed in the C.Cup finals when Brazil pretty much waltzed up and down the midfield at will, not to mentioned put a pounding on Riquelme. At the Copa finals, he'd pretty much reduced Alex to a spectator. This guy is like a one-man buzzsaw to opposing midfields. He almost always wins the ball away without ever getting carded. I don't think Argentina can beat Brazil should they meet without Mascherano.

Good post. Agree on what you said about Lucio. However, even though both Riquelme and Mascherano are absolutely necessary, I think Riquelme is the least replaceable of the two for Argentina if they hope to do well in the WC. I don't see Argentina with Mascherano but without Riquelme progressing much further in the competition.

[Kaushik]

Brasil – A tough one here. Ronaldo could be replaced with Adriano. If CAP chooses to stay with two goal scoring strikers, Oliveira partnered with either, though less potent, still gives them a strike force capable of winning. If either Gaucho or Kaka go down, well Juninho or Alex can move in. I thought about Emerson, but G.Silva won the WC last time. All the CBs available are about the same level (some on BS would argue that Roque’s injury would strengthen the squad). The FBs don’t decide games anymore, but bring great experience. However, if one of them went down, there is enough senior leadership on the team to continue strong. Dida's back-up is a WC winning caliber keeper.

By default then, it’s ZeRoberto. The least heralded of the players from midfield and forward, but plays CAP’s system to perfection. Able to run all game, support RC, and move the ball from deep in midfield to the forwards. Though his absence most weakens the team, they still would be contenders for the title.

With him: strong contenders for title
Without him: can make finals
Ze Roberto has no natural successor in the Brazilian NT at the moment. Without him Brazil may be forced to play differently. However, I do not subscribe to the view that without him Brazil can't win the WC. Before the advent of Adriano, Ronaldo was the least replaceable in the team. At present, however, no one is more necessary than Lucio. No matter what system is adopted, he simply has to be in the team for Brazil to succeed. None of the other defenders in Brazil can replace him consummately.

[MVFC]

Australia - Craig Moore

[dor02]

Italy – Pirlo. Without him they become too Totti dependent. Totti’s role could be undertaken by Cassano or Del Piero, with a semblance of continuity (though missing his spark). My second choice here was Nesta, as I don’t find the Azzuri particularly deep at CB these days. However, Pirlo’s deep playmaking gives Italy a different wrinkle.

With him: could make finals
Without him: won’t pass the semis At the moment will agree with you. He is very calm, reliable and consistant as well as being a very good free-kick taker. His free-kicks helped Italy to beat Scotland in the previous World Cup Qualifier.

The Azzurri would be better off without Totti because he loses the plot too quickly but another player who is of great importance to the Azzurri is Gennaro Gattuso. He is a willing, determined and solid midfielder who never gives up and his presence in the Azzurri midfield will play a part in Italy's run at Germany 2006.

If Australia somehow makes it, an irreplacable player for the Socceroos is Marco Bresciano. He has been a much better player for the Socceroos than Viduka and Kewell and when he plays, he is always among Australia's best players. Bresciano gives the Socceroos more drive in the midfield. I can't see Australia doing much but Bresciano might help Australia to get a draw at least. If he's not there, a repeat of the Confederations Cup is likely.

[Bertje]

Holland - Arjen Robben. He is on his way to becoming one of the best if not the best player in the world. He is simply unstoppable for any fullback. Holland is very deep in midfielders and as always deep in strikers. We lack a second worldclass winger but our options there are both about the same level. Where Kuijt will give you more pressure options van Persie will more likely put in some good crosses. In the center we have van Nistelrooij, Kuijt, van der Vaart and van Persie.

In midfield: van der Vaart, Sneijder, de Jong, Maduro, van Bommel, Davids, Landzaat and Cocu. Cocu is also very important for his experience, but even while we have a young squad we have plenty of otehr opstions for experience.

Even though we might lack a worldclass defender, all our options there are more then good enough. Boulahrouz is a true killer, while he is no Stam I have yet to see a striker get past him on a consistant basis. Mathijsen is our weakest link, but strong in the air and that is exactly what we need next to Boulahrouz. For back-up we have the experienced Opdam, supertalent Vlaar and Heitinga. While our left fullback isn't the best, he is good enough and the same goes for his replacement. On the right we have Kromkamp who might even be better then we have had for years and de Jong can also play there.

In the goal we have Edwin van der Sar who is one of the best goalkeepers around and penalty-killer Henk Timmer as his replacement. Both are great all-round goalkeepers.

With Robben: We can make the final and who knows, we might even win it.
Without Robben: Then my bet would be on the semi's.

[Dark Savante]

I'd extend on what Rooney means to England.

He's the absolute catalyst of the team and has become the go to man in any critical situation. It is a good thing in that he can handle it with ease...it is a bad thing in that without him the team looks lost. Because he is adept in numerous roles and has the work rate of two men the subtles in his game can often go unoticed. He links the play, he makes the play he often ends the play and England haven't had a player like that since Sheringham/Gascoigne but unlike the other two Rooney hasn't got an offensive weakness so becomes even more of a crux...for example Sherngham is great link man but he is slow and and always needed to find space for himself ahead of a play - Rooney is fast and much stronger than Sheringham ever was and often uses it to just barge through swathes of opposition it also means that he can do the unexpected frequently and often you will see the ball go to and through him no matter the circumstance regarding his spatials.. when you get that dependant on a player you are going to be in big trouble if he is out. He literally has the quality to be one of the stars next year..and anyone with eyes and a knowledge of the game can see he is irrplaceable for both his club and country...worringly so imo..the plan B for both sides at times is 'just pass it to Rooney and he'll do something for us' when the plan B isn't an option I think both teams could capitulate.

Portugal

Carvalho. He marshalls their defence he sets the tempo of the game for them and he adds a calm and control they would be lost without. Ronaldo is equally essential for them. Unlike his Man Utd form, he frequently delivers goals for Portugal so of all their wide-men he is the one who can make, create and convert. All their cover lack in at least one of the 3elements and Figo wont have the juice to do much on his own. If either Carvalho or Ronaldo are out Portugal will have voids they can't fill.

France

Zidane. As proven yet again...they cannot function without him and have no replacement in any other role who can take over his mantle. On paper they seem stacked all over the pitch but their players don't often deliver for the NT.

[Joep]

Great topic

And Bertje beat me too it. Sad part is that there's a big chance we have to do without him, simply because he is injured quite a lot and defenders on the WC will be looking for him.

[lanman]

Don't just indicate who you believe is the best player on the squad. Depending on your team composition, sometimes the loss of the best player can be overcome. When Brasil lost Pele in the second game of WC ’62, they were able to count on Garrincha to take them home. When they lost Pele in ’66, Garrincha was a shell of his former self, and the young guns (Jairzinho, Tostao), could not step up to that particular challenge.

This is a good thing to look at further - some of the very best sides could cope well without one of their best players (Brazil 62, Hungary 54) as they had others who could seemlessly slot in. Other sides relied almost exclusively on one player - Wales in 58 were a good side with one truly great player (John Charles). Without him they lost narrowly to Brazil (who went on tho thrash two very good sides in France and Sweden), with him they could quite easily have won.

Of the current teams Rooney is by far the least replacable. Without him England (or more specifically Eriksson) are completely devoid of ideas and resort almost exclusively to long balls.

I think France's reliance on Zidane is overstated - they have missed Deschamps since his retirement far more than Zidane. I've said before I don't think Zidane makes any side a great side, he improves a very good side into a great side but he will not take a team that is struggling and turn them around. The psychological boost of him returning may help France, but Makelele will improve the side more than Zidane.

[Dark Savante]

This is a good thing to look at further - some of the very best sides could cope well without one of their best players (Brazil 62, Hungary 54) as they had others who could seemlessly slot in. Other sides relied almost exclusively on one player - Wales in 58 were a good side with one truly great player (John Charles). Without him they lost narrowly to Brazil (who went on tho thrash two very good sides in France and Sweden), with him they could quite easily have won.

Of the current teams Rooney is by far the least replacable. Without him England (or more specifically Eriksson) are completely devoid of ideas and resort almost exclusively to long balls.

I think France's reliance on Zidane is overstated - they have missed Deschamps since his retirement far more than Zidane. I've said before I don't think Zidane makes any side a great side, he improves a very good side into a great side but he will not take a team that is struggling and turn them around. The psychological boost of him returning may help France, but Makelele will improve the side more than Zidane.
While it is true Zidane does not make a side great... he is their only offensive weapon. They've lacked 'anything' without him in '02 he was the only that showed in '04 and their qualifying campaign without him for '06...well... Deschamps along with all the others are missed because they kept France in control and composed but going forward they are limp and inept without Zidane imo.

[tpmazembe]

I think France's reliance on Zidane is overstated - they have missed Deschamps since his retirement far more than Zidane. I've said before I don't think Zidane makes any side a great side, he improves a very good side into a great side but he will not take a team that is struggling and turn them around. The psychological boost of him returning may help France, but Makelele will improve the side more than Zidane.
While it is true Zidane does not make a side great... he is their only offensive weapon. They've lacked 'anything' without him in '02 he was the only that showed in '04 and their qualifying campaign without him for '06...well... Deschamps along with all the others are missed because they kept France in control and composed but going forward they are limp and inept without Zidane imo.As I was posting last night, I couldn't come up with the least replaceable for France today. I must confess that I haven't followed them as much these past couple of years, and with the brand new return of the old guard the picture is muddled.

I like Thuram's return - if they play him center of defense - best personally; then Claude's.

But if France's issues in WCQ have been scoring goals, then maybe Dark is right in that a free Zidane may help create more.

I hope a France expert can help with this.

[tpmazembe]

Ze Roberto has no natural successor in the Brazilian NT at the moment. Without him Brazil may be forced to play differently. However, I do not subscribe to the view that without him Brazil can't win the WC. Before the advent of Adriano, Ronaldo was the least replaceable in the team. At present, however, no one is more necessary than Lucio. No matter what system is adopted, he simply has to be in the team for Brazil to succeed. None of the other defenders in Brazil can replace him consummately.Kaushik and DerMongerer, you guys are probably up to here with my views on the CB situation from the Brasil boards :p ...at least you know I don't underrate them and their role in the Brasilian system.

Lucio is great on his day, but can be inconsistent. Of all the CBs, he most deserves his starting spot, but as you know is nowhere near a conscensus pick with most Brasilian football experts. I truelly believe that he can be subbed at close to replacement value (I'm not saying as good). The way ZeRo helps the transition game, Renato has not mastered as of yet (he could). That's my thinking there.

Speaking of reliving WC history, and giving Brasilian CBs credit - (way to weave in a post huh :) ) the situation CAP was in just prior to WC '94 comes to mind.

People forget that before WC 1994 Ricardo Rocha and Ricardo Gomes (sp) were the first team CB pairing. They both got injured during the month preparation for the WC. Aldair and Marcio Santos were the back-ups, and were asked to be the new starting tandem right before the WC. Even so, they were the best pairing of that cup (IMO).

[PanchoM]

Argentina - I agree about Riquelme , and all their defence
but to me Argentina just looks like a much better team when they play Lucho Gonzales , he seams to change the team for the better when playing .

[Rakim_22]

I'm not sure if this could fit in this thread but...Mexico- What would Mexico be without Borghetti. I mean the amount of goals he has scored for the NT and his physical presence.
With him: quarterfinals again
without: early trip home

[PanchoM]

I'm not sure if this could fit in this thread but...Mexico- What would Mexico be without Borghetti. I mean the amount of goals he has scored for the NT and his physical presence.
With him: quarterfinals again
without: early trip home

I Disagree ,Mexico's attribute is its Defence we have had much better offence in the past but the Defence has been great lately .

[munichfan9]

i think that the most valuable player for USA would be Landon Donovan. He orchestrates the entire attack and without him the USA would come nowhere close to matching their 2002 result

[Sempre]

Italy – Pirlo. Without him they become too Totti dependent. Totti’s role could be undertaken by Cassano or Del Piero, with a semblance of continuity (though missing his spark). My second choice here was Nesta, as I don’t find the Azzuri particularly deep at CB these days. However, Pirlo’s deep playmaking gives Italy a different wrinkle.

With him: could make finals
Without him: won’t pass the semis

No; probably Nesta is more important to the Azzurri.

If anyone saw the game he had today vs. Scotland, it was
really special viewing, I think.

Italy was attacking with both full-backs and all of its midfielders
in search of the equalizer and it left both Nesta and Cannavaro
exposed to some pretty wicked counter-attacks. And it was a
joy to watch how Nesta erased each attack, after each frightful
tussle cleanly and calmly dribbling the ball out of the back.

As soon as he got injured in the Croatia game at Japanorea,
Italy went to pieces, conceding 5 goals in 3 games. (A flattering
statistic, because Buffon needed to make miraculous saves to
preserve any semblance of dignity.)

I do not think we can make the semis without Nesta, even if
we have some attacking power ATM.

Nice thread, by the way. Your choice of Pirlo is just as good--
he's the one pulling all the strings and I think when he is off
Italy is off. (He was off today and Italy barely managed a draw
with Scotland.)