Myth. protecting the central defence

[daxman]

don't get the original post's point. He seems to be a bit confused.

That was what I got too!

I can assure you the original poster was not confused. He was making more than one point, and they were quite subtle, so I can understand why some people would not comprehend. Maybe you need bullet points.
Hey ho.

Eh! There was a lot of meandering going on.

Let Me Bullet Point it for you:

1)Few Herders and Many Sheep:
1a) Herder: Pele is adding a player to protect the back 4.
1b) Sheep: Repeat, herder's statement

2) You: This is not true, all CMs defend. Part of there job

3) You: Best guy to protect the back 4: Nastasic.

4) In other words, you are buying into the very sentiment you derided in 1, 1a, and 1b. That we need to install a player to protect the back for.

This is what "at least" I mean by being confusing. And no. there was nothing subtle about your points. Just ever so slightly contradictory.

Anyway, parts of your original point in 1(a, and b), had some value, but you quickly went away from it. By the way it is common Knowledge that CMs have multiroles. As for what Pelegrini is doing defensively, I agree you are right in saying folks got it wrong. But the reason why they got it wrong is not simply a function of CMs defending as a part of their job, they got it wrong coz most English fans have a static view of football. Defending is done as a team, in phases and pockets of the field. Kind of exactly like attacking.

High line? Yes. Coz it reduces the area to be defended.
Early defending? Yes, coz it distrupts the oppositions ability to build, and also puts pressure on those that might be weakest with the ball (defenders).
Area defending? Yes, this is what happens when Strikers run at an angle to the goalie, because they want to force him to pass it to the other angle or punt it. It is the basis for Barca and Dortmund's 6 seconds defending. You force the ball to the smaller area of the pitch, gang up against the ball carrier, and close down his closest outlet.
All of the above are done with no regards for the static nature of who is the DM or AM or CM or LM or RM, or even FW for that matter. The whole team defends from the front.

When it is done at its best, the FW forces the play to one side of the field Preferably the shorter side: If it is for example the left side, then the LM, gets close to the fullback, the support striker picks up the DM outlet and the CM comes in to double team the RB with the ball. He is left with one option, punt it deep.

That is how best defensive practices work. And not whether you have a tackling Machine at DM. Sure it will be great to have one (who is also a fantastic midfielder) but it shouldn't be a requirement. No one in the starting lineups of Barca, Dortmund, or Real, are exceptional tackling DMs, but it works coz they have a philosophy of defending. Not a Back 4 protector.

 

[6one]

Personally I feel the modern way of trying to label midfielders as either a holder or an attacker is too straightforward.

There is an obsession with the holding midfielder when it is far better to have complete players.

Yaya is the quintessential complete midfielder, better than Vieira in my view, the most complete midfielder in the World at present I would say.

Fernandinho has had an understated (undervalued?) start, but he also is equally adept in attack as in defence.

Over time a partnership will form between the two where they will develop an understanding of who will attack in one moment while the other sits.

This process takes a little while, and instead of calling for a holding midfielder, which would reduce our attacking numbers and thus potency, we should instead be patient.