Defensive Midfield Postion .Is It a boon or a bane ? (1 Viewer)

[ararossi]

I been wondering about the fuss of teams requiring a defensive midfielder to get their game or tactics right eg-MAN U getting Owen Hargreaves to enforce the midfield .Is this postion so important and relevant to today game ?The role of a defensive midfielder is more advance role of a Sweeper where both these sets of postions requited the player to read the game and break up attacking play and be the fulcrum of link play to start the attack but now with overlapping fullbacks the defensive mid can act as a third centreback, but if the fullbacks kept their line
than the midfield would not require a defensive Midfielder why waste a midfielder from patrolling the backline when the centrebacks and fullbacks will be able to that, that midfielder will be able to support in attack if there a counter attack u would have the respective fullback supporting his side of field where the attack came from together with centrebak. would top teams be able to play as such?
I am not against that defensive Midfield postion they have been great players such as Rijkaard ,Viera, Gattuso and now mascherano .Just some food for thought

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Badass J Elkann]

the way i see it is that there are 2 forms of def mids, one that sit in front of the defence to basically win the ball and break up the play, and the ones that sit in front of the defence and spray the ball forwards and create the play from deep

 

[ararossi]

the way i see it is that there are 2 forms of def mids, one that sit in front of the defence to basically win the ball and break up the play, and the ones that sit in front of the defence and spray the ball forwards and create the play from deep

Yes that right more so in the case of milan where Gattuso is the destroyer and Pirlo the deep lying playmaker but would it work if both them were not playing deep and supporting the attack while maldini/Kaladze and oddo/Cafu just sat back in a flat back four without overlappings runs?

 

[Badass J Elkann]

Yes that right more so in the case of milan where Gattuso is the destroyer and Pirlo the deep lying playmaker but would it work if both them were not playing deep and supporting the attack while maldini/Kaladze and oddo/Cafu just sat back in a flat back four without overlappings runs?

gatusso has played on the right but he doesnt provide width but strictly speaking gatusso just runs around like a headless chicken wanting the ball and passing it to someone to attack

 

[edgardavids2608]

I think you need a player like this to stop the counter attacks. I like to see a fairly balanced dm that can contribute a little bit. Davids was the best Dm of his time imo and viera at arsenal really helped defensively and possesion. If somehow you have a Kaka or someone of similar playingstyles behind the forward and a defender has to step he will punish you 98%of the time...whereas if you have a dm to cut off his angle and lead him into more defenders it is alot less likely. Liverpool stopped Kaka by putting pressure early not telling Nesta to do it by himself.

 

[tonykart]

I prefer to have one guy in the middle who tries to break up attack before they get to the defense. The Milan central midfield is perfect.

 

[Lawnchair Bes]

it's all about experimenting with new tactics that the oppossition is not used to and also, having more options

 

[Badass J Elkann]

I prefer to have one guy in the middle who tries to break up attack before they get to the defense. The Milan central midfield is perfect.

well thats about to change when nocerino storms serie A

 

[edgardavids2608]

All i know is you get caught with both your cms up your screwed and you have to give a yellowcard tackle to stop them from running at your defense...you see it so many times.you cant be flat unless you are very slow going up bc they will slice you.

 

[ararossi]

I think you need a player like this to stop the counter attacks. I like to see a fairly balanced dm that can contribute a little bit. Davids was the best Dm of his time imo and viera at arsenal really helped defensively and possesion. If somehow you have a Kaka or someone of similar playingstyles behind the forward and a defender has to step he will punish you 98%of the time...whereas if you have a dm to cut off his angle and lead him into more defenders it is alot less likely. Liverpool stopped Kaka by putting pressure early not telling Nesta to do it by himself.

ya thats a good point reagarding the type of DM as some can only break up attacks but can't pass for shit while others like your namesake could break attack and supply as well.In the scenario Of kaka type of player since the supposed back four with stactic fullbacks will take turns to mark players, right side fullback will be supporting the the right side centre-back and vice versa so a possibility of of kaka being one on one after beating the first defender will be slim.
Why i keep harping on the static defence was in my early as a footballer i played as a leftback and we tried a statcic back four it worked well because we hardly conceded gols in matches but emphasis was on the midfield to create and score so we won game with 1 nil or 2 nil scoreline the most because the fullbacks did not overlapp the most we went was to the halfway line no more that that

 

[edgardavids2608]

What I was saying about the defense was if Kaka has to beat one player at a time he has the advantage. He can beat every player on your team if they come at him one at a time. And trust me it works so much better funneling players into your help(other defenders). It also helps the defense keep there shape if they dont have to pick up midfielders dashin at them. Its all fine and dandy until you have your flatback being run at by the likes of Seedorf Kaka Ronaldo and Pippo who if you push up he will kill you with that cm of onsides play.

 

[edgardavids2608]

the way C. Ronaldo was shut down is that Gattuso would eat him every time he got the ball. Some players deserve enough respect to have a player assigned to them directly. I teamate of mine I played club with and now that i play college soccer with was playing us in the playoffs. He scored 52 goals in 28 games and my dumbass coach decided he doesnt need to be followed by anyone. Of course we had the better team but he scored an early goal on us and boxed it in. He found the only Sophmore on hte team and made him look foolish. I we would of had a player sitting and being on his back that would never happen.

 

[denco]

I been wondering about the fuss of teams requiring a defensive midfielder to get their game or tactics right eg-MAN U getting Owen Hargreaves to enforce the midfield .Is this postion so important and relevant to today game ?The role of a defensive midfielder is more advance role of a Sweeper where both these sets of postions requited the player to read the game and break up attacking play and be the fulcrum of link play to start the attack but now with overlapping fullbacks the defensive mid can act as a third centreback, but if the fullbacks kept their line
than the midfield would not require a defensive Midfielder why waste a midfielder from patrolling the backline when the centrebacks and fullbacks will be able to that, that midfielder will be able to support in attack if there a counter attack u would have the respective fullback supporting his side of field where the attack came from together with centrebak. would top teams be able to play as such?
I am not against that defensive Midfield postion they have been great players such as Rijkaard ,Viera, Gattuso and now mascherano .Just some food for thought

As long as you have 1 then its a boon, if you have 2 or 3 like Capello and Mourinho use then its a bane as far as I am concerned. I personally do not think you need a defensive midfielder if you are so much better than the opposition especially when playing at home. manchester united could have done with hargreaves against Milan last season. If Milan did not play with a defensive midfielder like Roma did against Manchester United, then Ronaldo would have eaten them alive. Some teams with special players, you have to have a specialist defensive midfielder but not more than 1 in a team. You are difficult to beat quite alright but you would find it difficult to win big matches unless your opposition decides to help you out with stupid lineups. I would not class Pirlo as a defensive midfielder because he is not and neither is daniele de rossi. In fact Roma play without 1 and its good going forward but its not so great if you are constantly attacked

 

[ararossi]

the way C. Ronaldo was shut down is that Gattuso would eat him every time he got the ball. Some players deserve enough respect to have a player assigned to them directly. I teamate of mine I played club with and now that i play college soccer with was playing us in the playoffs. He scored 52 goals in 28 games and my dumbass coach decided he doesnt need to be followed by anyone. Of course we had the better team but he scored an early goal on us and boxed it in. He found the only Sophmore on hte team and made him look foolish. I we would of had a player sitting and being on his back that would never happen.

Fair enought comment on marking out a threat but i was talking about the switchover tactic eg we had a match where the opposing team had a killer player me and my left side centre took him out to dry so it can work but understanding is very important beacuse if he beat sme then my left-side centreback pushes into his line and i take up the centre backs postions, it like zonal marking where u dont 'follow the man but follow your area to defend

 

[ararossi]

As long as you have 1 then its a boon, if you have 2 or 3 like Capello and Mourinho use then its a bane as far as I am concerned. I personally do not think you need a defensive midfielder if you are so much better than the opposition especially when playing at home. manchester united could have done with hargreaves against Milan last season. If Milan did not play with a defensive midfielder like Roma did against Manchester United, then Ronaldo would have eaten them alive. Some teams with special players, you have to have a specialist defensive midfielder but not more than 1 in a team. You are difficult to beat quite alright but you would find it difficult to win big matches unless your opposition decides to help you out with stupid lineups. I would not class Pirlo as a defensive midfielder because he is not and neither is daniele de rossi. In fact Roma play without 1 and its good going forward but its not so great if you are constantly attacked

Yes teams that play with 2 or more defensive players can't create as much as those with perhaps with one usually it work if when one them could pass well and other one can destroy well if there are two destroyers in that midfield that u end up losing possesion and creating more pressure for the team.Roma main mistake was playing fullbacks so high up the pitch like wingers so whenever Man U breaked they had could espose the flanks and alot of the goals came from that were Chivu and Mexes were left stranded and no cover it also boils down to the arrogance or inexperience of Spalleti and they were heavily punished for that

 

[edgardavids2608]

I dont know what league you played in but as soon as one guy slides it isnt rare that another will be sprinting into that space and you are cought between shifts. All it takes is the far forward to run near post and another midfielder to fillin that space on the far side and one of them will most likely be open. These players are to good for that.

 

[ararossi]

I dont know what league you played in but as soon as one guy slides it isnt rare that another will be sprinting into that space and you are cought between shifts. All it takes is the far forward to run near post and another midfielder to fillin that space on the far side and one of them will most likely be open. These players are to good for that.

that was so called soccer elite school funded by milo and played matches against various youth teams around the region if u like to know.
I aware of that but u have your other two defenders that will close in on that midfielder or forward we have slight difference of opnion that good , but with a good system any player can taken out has happen before will happen again Greece with their 2 banks of four in the last Euro , France against Brazil where there was no marking on kaka or ronaldinho but excellent pressing and so forth even the recent Brazil Win against Argentina in the Copa

 

[metalhead]

Great thread ararossi...

There are many benefits to the defensive midfielder.
1. Gives you the advantage of double teaming the opposition's dangerous players without losing your shape. Using a back 4 with no cover up front will usually lead the CBs to be pulled to the sides (trying to provide cover) creating gaps in the middle.

2. Modern football has lost the midfield fantasista because of the wingers and fullbacks. The midfield is congested and its hard creating chances there so coaches use full backs to create numerical advantages on the wings.

3. If one fullback goes forward and the ball is lost, there are still 4 players protecting the goal if you have a DM. Otherwise you'll have 3 defenders either playing high line with an offside trap or too deep to stop the danger of a counter attack. These two situations can be beaten effectively by quality opposition.

If I was coach, I'd like to have a distroyer who has a fierce shot, which is what Nocerino might be like. Daniele De Rossi is this type of midfielder but he needs to improve his defensive skills.

 

[ararossi]

Based on the response most of u all feel that a defensive midfielder is a boon when played correctly and indeed relevant to today's modern game, i would like to thank all who have taken part , keep it going cheers

 

[Bozi]

As long as you have 1 then its a boon, if you have 2 or 3 like Capello and Mourinho use then its a bane as far as I am concerned. I personally do not think you need a defensive midfielder if you are so much better than the opposition especially when playing at home. manchester united could have done with hargreaves against Milan last season. If Milan did not play with a defensive midfielder like Roma did against Manchester United, then Ronaldo would have eaten them alive. Some teams with special players, you have to have a specialist defensive midfielder but not more than 1 in a team. You are difficult to beat quite alright but you would find it difficult to win big matches unless your opposition decides to help you out with stupid lineups. I would not class Pirlo as a defensive midfielder because he is not and neither is daniele de rossi. In fact Roma play without 1 and its good going forward but its not so great if you are constantly attacked

Great thread ararossi...

There are many benefits to the defensive midfielder.
1. Gives you the advantage of double teaming the opposition's dangerous players without losing your shape. Using a back 4 with no cover up front will usually lead the CBs to be pulled to the sides (trying to provide cover) creating gaps in the middle.

2. Modern football has lost the midfield fantasista because of the wingers and fullbacks. The midfield is congested and its hard creating chances there so coaches use full backs to create numerical advantages on the wings.

3. If one fullback goes forward and the ball is lost, there are still 4 players protecting the goal if you have a DM. Otherwise you'll have 3 defenders either playing high line with an offside trap or too deep to stop the danger of a counter attack. These two situations can be beaten effectively by quality opposition.

If I was coach, I'd like to have a distroyer who has a fierce shot, which is what Nocerino might be like. Daniele De Rossi is this type of midfielder but he needs to improve his defensive skills.

some good points made in this thread, for me a good, hard tackling DM is neccessary. people are always saying that teh "fantatista" is dead and gone, however nowadays teams often play with an attacking midfielder that is neither midfielder or forward who sits in the hole between defense and midfield(thnk kaka). modern tactics have evolved and the role of the Dm has once again become much more important at the top level of the game.

however, the DM is not a modern-day advancement. look at the past at the great teams and they always had a "water carrier". italy won the world cup with tardelli in that role, france with deschamps,dunga with brazil, sure they all evolved from the sweeper position that beckenbauer made his own, but der kaiser was equally at home in midfield as in defense.

for me a strong CB pairing and a strong DM is always the starting point of a team, from there the Wb can attack and the wingers or AM can push forward without the worry of gaping holes at the back