Attacking Midfielder vs Central Midfielder vs Defensive Midfielder

Discussion in 'USA Men: News & Analysis' started by appoo, Oct 19, 2004.

  1. Bryan Gividen

    Bryan Gividen New Member

    Mar 8, 2003
    Provo, UT (BYU)
    Yeah, and so does most of the world. He's all about winning balls in the center of the pitch and then quickly getting them back to the offense.

    Yeah, he is.

    The guy who started this thread needs to read up on the guys he's posting about....
     
  2. lmorin

    lmorin Member+

    Mar 29, 2000
    New Hampshire
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Appoo--The definitions will vary according to teammates and talent of the individual. Some players are very good at going forward; others at ball winning. Some gravitate a bit toward the back and prefer to work from there; others prefer to work more toward the front. Keane, in his prime, was the perfect defensive midfielder. Call him what you will, but the guy covered the width and breadth of the defensive half, ate up attacks and distributed tons of short balls. He generally led the league in total passes and was near or at the top in total tackles. However, he also knew how to take his scoring chances as well as create them. He still does, but unfortunately for the world of soccer, his career is declining rapidly now. It is all about skill. Armas, Zavagnin, Mastroeni all have their own skill sets, but none comes close to the breadth and depth of Keane's. Having one guy like Keane in that position enables the team to operate differently. No need for a second defensive midfielder. A "holding" midfielder to work off Keane would be good, but not necessary. An attacking midfielder, perhaps someone like Scholes or now, Rooney or, better yet, Donovan, would really do the trick, working with RVN and Smith.
     
  3. swedust

    swedust Member+

    Aug 30, 2004
    I like the analytical aspect of this thread, but agree with earlier posts to the point that positions in soccer are not as cut-and-dried as this.

    Apoo choosing high-profile players as representative examples of the positions is telling: it is each individual player's skill sets that define the role they play on the team. Their level of skill defines what team/league they play for.

    The other determining factor is that player's teammates. Good example (sited on this thread) was LD playing striker in MLS, A-mid for USNats. Same player, same skills, different teammates.

    A manager has to find a way to get the best players at their disposal onto the field. The "gravitational pull" of exceptional players' skills draws the team, and therefore player selection and formation (as noted previously by EVS), in a given direction. Whatever level you're playing at, youth-league or Serie A, you allow the top players to contribute in the way that's best for them, then fill in around them.

    So the definitions are a good starting point for saying "Player X is more of an A-mid than a D-mid, but Player Y is more like a straight middie." But it's only a starting point. Teams are built of players, not positions. Soccer is not the NFL.
     
  4. imasyko

    imasyko Member+

    May 16, 2002
    Spring City, PA
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    And I think you haven't watched Rooney play for England or ManU lately - in both instances, he is used as a 'withdrawn forward' (more of a semantics issue between this and 'attacking mid').
     
  5. nobody

    nobody Member+

    Jun 20, 2000
    I gotta disagree with the idea that good teams don't use defensive midfielders. It becomes a bit of a circular agruement too, when everytime someone points out top notch defensive midfielder, like Davids or Viera, they suddenly aren't defensive mids after all because they know how to pass the ball. Well, that ability to be great defensive mids that have a high level of skill and move the ball forward after winning it is what makes them great examples of very effective defensive midfielders.

    Besides, there have been many great eeams that field defensive midfielders, Germany and Italy do so regularly and as pointed out earlier in this thread, even the attack-minded Brazilians have done so. Defensive midfielders are an important part of the game and many teams from crap teams to great ones have used them and will continue to do so.
     
  6. appoo

    appoo Member+

    Jul 30, 2001
    USA
    you can line up Rooney where ever you want but his game is similar to that of an Attacking midfielder. He drops back to recieve the ball, makes crazy runs with or without the ball, attacks the goal both inside and outside the box, and does his best to set up teamates. Watch him play. he also lines up in the so-called Attacking Midfielder position in England's latest game, and against Boro he dropped back into that position later on. I would call Wayne Rooney exactly what you want in an attacking midfielder.
     
  7. appoo

    appoo Member+

    Jul 30, 2001
    USA
    my point with the definitions was to get out that, in general there are 3 different positions you can have in the middle of the midfield. I'll agree that you have some guys like Davids and Keano who make such definitions meaningless, but for the other 99% you can place them in one of those 3 positions.

    This is my point. When Bruce goes to his 442, you have a series of options you can have in the middle of the field.

    DM - CM
    DM - AM
    CM - CM
    CM - AM

    you can't have a standard lineup here because we aren't good enough. My thoery is that you use a basic strategy based upon how good the opponent is:

    Weaker Opponent: DM - AM
    Equal Opponent: CM - AM or CM - CM
    Stronger Opponent: DM - CM or CM - CM

    against a weaker opponents (anyone in CONCACAF not named Mexico, Jamaica, or Costa Rica) I don't think we need a central midfielder to set tempo. we can simply attack at will because we don't really need to worry about a threat coming back at us.

    against an opponent thats strong that us you not only need to defend first, you also need to attack carefully and the proper time. Else your gonna get toasted. We don't have the defenders that are capable of handling a world class attack, basically no one does this side of Italy really. No, you need to control the midfield and tempo, and the only way to do that is by getting a class effort from a central midfielder, who has a defensive midfielder to take some of the defensive pressure off of him. If you have two class central midfielders, then you can line both of them up also so they can help each other out with the decision making. The worked fabulously for us against Holland pre-World Cup when we paired O'Brien and Reyna together, and worked again against Germany. We also used a D-Mid C-Mid pairing very well when we played Italy before the World Cup. In that case Armas helped relieve pressure from Reyna.

    Against opponents that are the equal of our defense, you have a pretty good choice. If both Reyna and O'Brien are helthy I think you start both, if only one of them are healthy you start Donovan.

    that was basically my ulterior motive. I wanted to talk about pairings, but to do that I wanted to get the 3 positions out there first
     
  8. Crimen y Castigo

    May 18, 2004
    OakTown
    Club:
    Los Angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Exactly.
    Sven sees him -- and has recently used him -- in the England side as a replacement for the recently-retired Paul Scholes.

    Rooney himself has commented on it, saying he's happy to play that non-forward role if it means he's on the pitch. And the trio of him playing behind, Owen and Defoe certainly seemed to click.

    So it may be semantics, but right now I'd call him an attacking mid for England.
     
  9. sidefootsitter

    sidefootsitter Member+

    Oct 14, 2004
    Franz Beckenbauer was a sweeper/a holding midfielder/ an attacking central midfielder/a coach on the field all at once.

    Lothar Mattäus also played a very loosely defined midfield role.

    Then the Germans had wing-backs like Breitner, Kaltz and Brehme who were nominal defenders but played wide midfield when the situation required it.

    Also, the Mannschaft had midfielders/wingers like Grabowski and Uli Höness who could play either central mid/withdrawn forward or a straight winger.

    Most of these star players were "two footed", which is where Landon Donovan has an advantage as well. By comparison, DMB and Eddie Lewis are primarily left-footed players no matter where they line-up.

    Once in a while you may even see an All-Creative-Mid formation such as Brazil, 1970 which had Pele, Gerson and Rivelino running in circles around the pitch and around everyone on the pitch. In that set-up, Gerson took the ball from own defenders and Pele did his thing further on top.

    Reyna and Mathis can be a Gerson-type player within the US formation. LD has to sort of do his Pele thing. Now all Bruce needs is a Jairzinho and a Tostao clone and the US will be on its way.
     
  10. Crimen y Castigo

    May 18, 2004
    OakTown
    Club:
    Los Angeles
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    The word you're looking for is "libero." The Kaiser modeled his role after Italy's Giacinto Facchetti.

    There aren't too many of those anymore, although it'd be interesting to hear some nominations.
     
  11. imasyko

    imasyko Member+

    May 16, 2002
    Spring City, PA
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    But you over-look the one basic criteria - who is available for any given game. We have a limited number of midfield options compared to the European countries, and certain players do not filt certain midfield positions.
     
  12. twenty

    twenty New Member

    Sep 28, 2004
    Dude, I hate to say it, but if this was the point of this thread, then the initial run-around was totally unnecessary. Many of the responses basically said that you can't pigeon-hole players into one of three categories. Instead you have to treat each player as an individual case.

    So there's no point in defining generic categories and then assigning American midfielders to each category in order to determine who should be on the field. You've just got to consider what each individual player brings to the game and dump all the CM DM AM stuff, or at least don't let that stuff take precedence over a player's actual ability. Anyway, it seems we've done no more than come full circle to the "Field General" thread.

    Also, I think you underestimate Landon's ability to control the pace of a game. He knows what he's doing and he paces the game the way he sees fit, even if you don't interpret it as "class." And by the way, wtf is "class" and why do you keep applying it only to CMs? Is "class" some kind of objective, techincal term that's supposed to actually refer to something?
     
  13. aek chicago

    aek chicago Member

    Sep 17, 2004
    My opinion is that it depends on your formation (4-4-2, 3-5-2, etc...). The way I've always thought of it is that in virtually all cases, you would like two flank midfielders to create width, particularly nowadays since virtually no team plays with classic wingers. That being said, in a 4 man midfield, that leaves only 2 other players. Therefore, one MF must assume an attacking/playmaking role and the other a defensive/cover role. In a 5 man midfield, you still have your "#10", but the remaining two midfielders (outside the flank MF's) probably will be a defensive sort and then maybe a holding player.

    I'm also of the opinion that certain MF players can not be easily defined. Edgar Davids is a case in point. Very versatile, although probably best suited in a defensive role. Lotthar Matteus is another great example. I always considered him a def. mid., but his role on various teams changed. Juan Sebastien Veron is a player who can play an attacking role (although I think he's miscast as a playmaker), a holding role, AND a defensive role. I personally like him in a defensive role because I believe he's much better from a deep lying position. However, in a 5 man midfield, he probably is better as a holding player. That being said, you'll often see him in attacking positions.

    As an aside, my favorite defensive midfielder was Fernando Redondo. Anyone else share that view?
     
  14. Dan Roudebush

    Dan Roudebush New Member

    Mar 31, 1999
    Agree 100%

    The way some guys discuss the game you would think it is static.
     
  15. Walter3000

    Walter3000 Member+

    Apr 8, 2004
    gainesville, Florida
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    DM-viera, keane, makalele
    cm-gerrard, davids
    am-totti, nedved, zidane

    wayne rooney is a forward, sure he drops back but that just makes him a Cf more than a true striker. i also would never put his name in their with these players just because he had one good international tournament, hes done crap in the epl.
     
  16. Tobas

    Tobas Member

    Jul 22, 2004
    Littleton, MA
    I have to disagree with this. It is not simply a matter of putting the best players out there. It is about putting the best team out there. What good is it if you have you next 10 best players that play one style and the best player that keeps wanting to use his style on the match. It will end up hurting the team. So, when putting a team togeather you have to look at both: who are the best players and how they will play with each other. In this example, you do not want to build around the best player. Soccer is a team game, and you really need all 11 players on the same page to make it work great. I am not trying to say this is the case with the US.

    This is where I disagree, it is everyones job to control the tempo of the game. In more of a DM style player, do you want a quick pass to the AM or one of the forwards, a pass out to the wings, a pass back to the backline, or just hold it. Do you want your AM player to imediatly run at the goal, try to spring the forwards, hold the ball in the offensive end while a winger opens up. There are many ways to play each position.

    To me a CM main responsibility is to control the midfield, not just the tempo. A team should togeather try and control the tempo, this includes everyone on the field. Not everything has to go through the midfield for a team to be effitive and control the tempo. How fast do the defenders play the ball forward and to who. Do the attackers try to run at defenders or hold up the ball for support. Tempo is over the whole field.

    In my opinion in a diamond midfield it is not this simple. If you have a AM-CM then one of the backs better be playing as almost a DM. To me if you lineup in a AM-CM style, then the CM is in most cases going to be a DM first, but is given more freedom to attack then a pure destroying DM.
     
  17. appoo

    appoo Member+

    Jul 30, 2001
    USA
    I'm talking in generalities here. I understand that players can hold more than one role and that they can chance responsibilities. I'm not talking about any specific opponent. I'm just saying if were playing an opponent we feel won't rouble our backline then we might be better off with Reyna off the field and just stick someone who won't worry about offense and will just leave the ball alone rather than keep demaning it in the middle of the field. like Armas or Zevagnin. They don't need the ball at their feet to do their jobs.

    against team we might or might not be afraid of, you'll probably want a Reyna-type player because he can control the pace of the attack. I'm not saying he's going to be the one sending the balls forward but at least he is availible at any given moment to recieve the ball under pressure, relieve pressure, or initate the attack.

    against teams better than your defense you DEFINATLY want him on the field because he's alway availible to relieve pressure and he can posses under pressure (one of the keys to being a central mid I think) and he'll hipefully know when to go forward. And in that match you probably don't want a pure attacking midfielder role because that player would then be attacking far too often and letting his central mid/d-mid.

    you'll not I didn't say WHO that central mid would have to be. Donovan would probably be perfectly acceptable as a 2nd Central Midfielder to Reyna if you asked him to hold back and let Reyna make most of the tactical decisions out there. Simply be availible for the ball. All I'm trying to say is that these might be the roles we want out on the field based upon an opponent. We aren't good enough to impose our will upon everyone so this is pretty much what we HAVE to do.
     
  18. nobody

    nobody Member+

    Jun 20, 2000
    One big problem with this approach is that it more or less assumes that all of your midfielders are equal quality players, just guys who do different things well. Were this the case, then the arguement that you assign a certain type of midfielder to whatever game it suits.

    Unfortuantely, that's just not the case. If your attacking midfielder, for example, blows, you may just choose not to play with one, regardless of the opposition. You may choose to attack with wingers and long balls instead and let a coupole guys just roam the middle and break things apart and feed the outside players or knock it back to the defense.

    If you have two very strong two-way/holding/central mids, whatever you want to call them, that surpass what you've got in the way of defensive mids, you may choose to play them all the time and let them share duties.

    There are many, many permutations on the field, but they all share one central theme and that is that the players you have dictate what you do, not some hypothetical tactical scenario.
     
  19. Walter3000

    Walter3000 Member+

    Apr 8, 2004
    gainesville, Florida
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    ---i dont understand the insistence of reyna being out there, hes slow, an average passer, and demands too much of the ball for a guy not great with it. donovan as the attacking mid and kerry or pablo as the dm, time to move on. donovan needs to be given the control of our midfield, we'll be a lot better off for it
     
  20. lmorin

    lmorin Member+

    Mar 29, 2000
    New Hampshire
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If Donovan is healthy, he has to be on the field. That's a given. The US does not have a young Roy Keane, so that places a limitation on the ability to slide by with only one defensive midfielder. There are two alternatives, as I see the situation. One is to use a box midfield with two fairly mobile defensive midfielders. Reyna and Zavagnin would be my choices. The other alternative depends on the health of JOB and would be my favorite. While not a Keane, he is the closest we have in total breadth of skill. I'd put him at the defensive midfield position with two wing mids and Donovan up front. The extent of attacking out of the back would be awesome and as good as most other teams could mount. Gaven on the left; DMB on the right. Or, v.v. as the case may be.
     
  21. sidefootsitter

    sidefootsitter Member+

    Oct 14, 2004
    What also complicated the matter for the US is that its talent choice, while greatly improved over the years, still doesn't have the variety of the top Euros and South Americans. Thus, Arena - unlike Ericsson, Lippi, Klinsmann or Peckerman - doesn't simply pick players to best match up against an opponent within "his" system but likely has to adjust his system to fit the players that he has available.

    If he's got Reyna, that pretty much eliminates the fast-break that the US ran so well against Pamana in the 2nd half because Cladio will hold the ball as a rule.

    Another pertinent question is this: why should the US adopt to other teams and play arguably its weaker players and not force other teams to adopt to the US?

    I'd rather choose the fast-break roster (DMB on the left mid, Brian West on the right mid, LD at the top of the diamond) and have the other mid chase them than hope for a Stefan Effenberg/Andrea Pirlo outlet pass from Chris Armas.

    As we saw in J/K, on a warm day, the opposing players were done by the 75 minute as they just could not keep up with the Yanks.

    Every team has its own style: the Brazilians have dribbling, the Germans power, the English their high-ball-into-the-box. There's no shame in being a team that can run its opponents into the ground. The only thing that matters is the results.

    PS. Fachetti was mostly a left wing-back throughout his career. Beckenbauer was the "deep" midfielder before he became a sweeper/libero/kaiser and scored 7 goals for West Germany in 1966 from his position, actually becomign the leading scorer for that team for the year.
     
  22. beergod

    beergod New Member

    Apr 6, 2003
    GA
    veron has always been more of a deep lying playmaker who is at his best in more of a free role, he isn't that great defensively

    Redondo was one of my favorites.
     
  23. beergod

    beergod New Member

    Apr 6, 2003
    GA
    I agree our personnel are well suited to a 4-2-3-1 but you can't play it with defensively minded fullbacks, the fullbacks have to be able to overlap down the wings and be able to attack to get the full effect out of it (cherundolo would do very well in this system, dunno who we would shove out at LB)
     
  24. Sanguine

    Sanguine Member

    Jul 4, 2003
    Reston, VA
    It all comes down to formation vs. posture. A coach determines the formation, the players determine the posture. I'm going to use a defensive example, but the same rules apply to midfield.

    Let's look at the US' left backs since that's one of the areas with the biggest posture disparity. We can put Bobby Convey at left back, and we can put Carlos Bocanegra there. Either eay, it's still the same position, but depending on the player, the posture of the formation changes dramatically.

    Managing these players and using them to match up against opponents is the challenge our coach faces. Given that we lack 11 star players to send out there, we're going to continue to have these trade-offs for some time. It's basically a given that we want Donovan and Beasley attacking (and thus not defending too much) out of our midfield. Beyond that, it's Arena's job to put players around them to help them succeed.

    If we put Convey and Cherundolo at the fullback spots, it makes sense to play the box midfield, as having two deep mids provides cover for their runs. If we want to play 1 d-mid and 3 across the front of the midfield (see the last Panama match) it makes sense to support them with sturdier outside backs.

    There's a ton of trade-offs when choosing players from our pool. We're a country that still needs to match up with our opponents to get our players in positions to succeed. Sometimes using one player dictates that another shouldn't be used. (Beasley-Donovan-Mathis across the front of midfield with Reyna behind didn't work well in Panama, but Lewis-Donovan-Beas with KZ behind worked well in the return leg)

    As we add more and more new players to the mix, it creates new problems. Can Gaven play on a wing in front of Cherundolo, or does he need a more defensive fullback behind him? Will Szetela be a strong enough ball-winner to play 3 mids in front of him?

    I suppose I've gone on long enough. I hope I made at least a little sense. (It is 5am after all)
     
  25. russ

    russ Member+

    Feb 26, 1999
    Canton,NY
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    POTY material.

    Bonus for the 5AM time. :)
     

Share This Page