A Holding Midfield Player. What does this Mean?

[Nobody]

You should only need a holding midfield player if you are playing a diamond 4 in midfield and where your wide players are largely attack minded. They will be the link player from back to front. In a flat 4 across the park both central midfielders should be able to capable of attacking and holding as the link between defence and attack.

 

Souness I remember tried playing Parker in the holding role of a diamond and played someone wholly unsuitable (can't remember who) in the creative role. It said everything about Souness. Our squad doesn't have the quality of player to make this system work. You could try Guthrie in the holding role with Barton advanced but it doesn't really suit either.

 

For this to work properly you need quality players otherwise the system can be torn apart and you lose midfield completely. When it works you can play through a flat midfield 4 and Chelsea/ Liverpool have shown how good it can be.

Chelsea don't play a diamond though. They play with a 1 DM, 1 Cm, and 1 AM.

In the Chelsea-formation (which is class if you've got the right players for it, think England could give a go), I'll agree with a DM, in a 4-4-2, I don't like them at all.

[Mr. Snrub]

In the Barcelona-formation (which is class if you've got the right players for it, think England could give a go), I'll agree with a DM, in a 4-4-2, I don't like them at all.

 

FYP.

[Guest s0ftcore]

I'm not sure where this leaves the box-to-box midfielder, put it this way if you want to play that position you have to be very good at it. You can see the consequences of playing the position badly by watching Scott Parker and his spell here. Whenever he sat in front of the back four, fine. As soon as he had his action man cap on it all went to pot, his midfield partner didn't know whether he was on his head or his arse, was he defending? Was he attacking? And there were pockets of space all over the park because of this. So I do think the box-to-box midfielder can work but it has to be played in the correct system where the individual is given a lisence to play this role knowing his team mates will be positioned to cover any gaps he leaves free and knowing his positioning will not affect the shape of the team (See Gerrard at Liverpool).

 

I believe the problem didn't just lay with Parker, but whoever his midfield partner was. Emre? Butt? They seemed to lack communication. You just don't see them talking to each other. Our best run of games was under Bowyer and Emre - Bowyer just seemed to the most vocal among the lot and Emre's not too quiet but it definitely helps when you're playing next to somebody who lets you know what he wants.

 

Bowyer was a vastly underrated box-to-box midfielder IMO. He didn't really need to come out with the challenges but because of his fitness he would be from one end to the other. Just being in position, especially defensively, helps out a lot when you can cover that angle of pass.

[Tsunami]

You should only need a holding midfield player if you are playing a diamond 4 in midfield and where your wide players are largely attack minded. They will be the link player from back to front. In a flat 4 across the park both central midfielders should be able to capable of attacking and holding as the link between defence and attack.

 

Souness I remember tried playing Parker in the holding role of a diamond and played someone wholly unsuitable (can't remember who) in the creative role. It said everything about Souness. Our squad doesn't have the quality of player to make this system work. You could try Guthrie in the holding role with Barton advanced but it doesn't really suit either.

 

For this to work properly you need quality players otherwise the system can be torn apart and you lose midfield completely. When it works you can play through a flat midfield 4 and Chelsea/ Liverpool have shown how good it can be.

Chelsea don't play a diamond though. They play with a 1 DM, 1 Cm, and 1 AM.

 

They have in the past, when they had Duff/ SWP. The point is they had Makele & then Essien to hold & Lampard to play forward. They ended up with too many quality players & tried to accommodate them (England anyone).

 

I remember who Souness played as the creative point to Parker's holding role; I had tried to erase it from memory - Amdy Faye.

[juniatmoko]

DM is needed when team play not using wingers. but all wide playing provide by attacking full back. so in term of strategic. when u at normal play u goes with this formation: 4-1-2-2-1. when u at attacking play. 3-4-2-1 the fullback become wingers that providing crosses or overlapping with attacking midfielder. when defending play it become 3-2-3-1 the fullback become wingback. so the zone playing of a DM here limited just into outside opponent penalty box. on those tactic DM has very important role. beside dictating play and reducing the attack from central position it also become a shadow centre-back (it makes no easy for opponent creating threat by facing 3 centre-back). DM could work with these formation also 4-1-3-2 (with 2 strikers) but it needed incredible fullback cause his coverage area must be 3/4 of pitch length.

 

4-4-2 is favourite formation for much team... but that formation i see the flaw very clear.. because it's too dependable to wingers to attack and too much spaces for opponent passes. and very difficult to do tactic with direct, short, quick passes. and usually after the they could not attack in opponent half. they just lump the ball to big forward and hoping for a flick-ons to the other forward.

[Cronky]

Obviously part of your central midfield has to protect the back four. Whether it's best delegated to one player or shared between two I'm not really sure. Maybe it depends on who's available.

 

But what's been a problem for us in the last few seasons is that we've had defensive midfielders who can't really pass the ball (Parker, Butt), and / or we've paired them with players who don't get into the opposition's box (Emre) Either way, there's not much point in winning the ball if you can't use it swiftly and well.

 

Of course if you've got athletes like Viera or Bryan Robson who can do both jobs, then it's problem solved. But those players are thin on the ground.

[Tsunami]

With quality of player we have at our disposal we have to play 442 otherwise we will be too easy to play against. Unfortunately we don't have a a decent RW or a good target man. This goes back to the shambles of the transfer window just gone and before that.

[Doug]

Obviously part of your central midfield has to protect the back four. Whether it's best delegated to one player or shared between two I'm not really sure. Maybe it depends on who's available.

 

But what's been a problem for us in the last few seasons is that we've had defensive midfielders who can't really pass the ball (Parker, Butt), and / or we've paired them with players who don't get into the opposition's box (Emre) Either way, there's not much point in winning the ball if you can't use it swiftly and well.

 

Of course if you've got athletes like Viera or Bryan Robson who can do both jobs, then it's problem solved. But those players are thin on the ground.

I just cant accept the last part of your post. I cannot believe that there are not players out there who can run for ninety minutes with high energy levels. Why do we have to put up with players who cant last the pace of a game.

They cant all play for the top 4, they can only put 11 players each on the pitch.

We have the whole world whose dream is to play in the premiership these days.

[wacko]

I cannot believe that there are not players out there who can run for ninety minutes with high energy levels. Why do we have to put up with players who cant last the pace of a game.

Most of our new signings say the training is much more intense than they've had before. Lot less running to do if you have the ball most of the time, too.