Midfield combination - Defensive midfielder + two attacking midfielders
- Thread starter roonster09
- Start date
I know that's what we have been doing but Martinez is better technically than any we fullback we have and Shaw is comfortable in the LCB role so when both are fit there is a chance to have Licha step up into midfield and Shaw move in to CB to form a 3 with Varane and AWB. Physically, a back three of AWB, Varane and Shaw is more robust and offers more recovery pace on top of being great one on one defenders.
City made it work because of Gundogan and the absolute top class quality of KDB. Gundogan is an 8 who can play as 6 comfortably, and then they overflow the midfield with Bernardo and even someone like Grealish/Foden.
Arsensl played with Xhaka and Partey behind Odegaard. My point being i don’t think it ever worked with one 6 and two 10s.
Arsensl played with Xhaka and Partey behind Odegaard. My point being i don’t think it ever worked with one 6 and two 10s.
Bruno is probably the best defensive 10 there is and ETH has got him to rein in on his careless play so he can do the 8.5 well, we saw at Newcastle that he can play the 8 and Mount coming just ensures that we don't lose creativity upfront when Bruno drops deep. Not very enthused with the move but it's done now and we have no choice other than to support.
At least since last season, Xhaka plays on the same line as Odegaard on the left side while Odegaard plays on the right. Its noticaeable because Xhaka who normally would play deeper now deliberately plays advanced with his body half turned to receive the ball and go. Only Partey sits behind.
So just like City, Arsenal since last season have played with one DM and two advanced midfielders. The key to it working it is the team's ability to dominate the ball and that is a function of the DM and the effectiveness of the press after the ball is lost.
It doesn’t matter on whatever line Xhaka was played he was never an attacking midfielder/10. It’s nothing new imo, in order to work, you still need a 6, an 8 with good defensive input and also capable in attack,and a number 10.
I wouldn't put it exactly like that because there's more to what constitutes a top-class midfielder nowadays, and the traditional binary division between defensive and attacking midfielders (which, to no surprise, is still one of the Caf's favourite pastimes) doesn't seem able to capture all the nuances of the varied roles at the centre of the park. Because it's the "roles" that matter, not the "positions".
Nevertheless, the gist of the OP is correct. I'd argue that what we're witnessing (and it has actually spawned some decent discussions in several players' threads) is the death of the "hard-man" in the midfield. Control and domination. Control the ball with good possession and control the pitch with good movement off the ball. One will argue that this has always been the case. What has changed is that, for a good 15 years now, more and more teams subscribe to the trend (advocated by both Pep and Klopp) that domination, no matter the philosophy, should be achieved in the opposition third. This has ultimately led to a new crop of players with a wide set of skills who are being preferred for the midfield roles.
Mount is a good signing for United. If we take De Jong as the model for what ETH wanted for that LCM role, it's a risky move. He can press, he can pass and he can deliver a killer pass from the half-spaces. Plus, he's an adequate ball-carrier and he possesses the skill-set to wriggle out of a tight spot without constantly losing the ball, which is a rarity in this United side.
If there's one difference between United and what the rest of the competition is trying to implement (and we still have to wait and see how the team will play next season), one could argue that the others get upgrades to enhance the way their midfield as a whole while Mount seems like an attempt to strike the right balance by adding and subtracting qualities. On the ball, he can be the yin to the yang that Bruno and Rashford often thrive in.
For what it's worth, i think Arteta's plan (on paper) is more courageous in terms of high-risk, high reward. But they have last season's foundations to build on, and Rice is an absolutely massive signing for them. It's also a move that fully agrees with what the OP is suggesting. Energy and endless running (as the only qualities in a midfielder) aren't prerequisites any more to balance out the more adventurous positioning that aims to dominate the spaces between the lines in the opponent's half. These things can be achieved via possession and off the ball movement. Possession, not as a means to always seek out the final pass so much, but more as the ability (Pep often puts in nicely) to "see the space". And off the ball movement not as a tool to get on the ball and become a hero, but to open up more options and help the team's shape maintain its balance. Possession and movement off the ball to increase the threat without unsettling the team's equilibrium. This is the endgame at the top of the pyramid nowadays.
Nevertheless, the gist of the OP is correct. I'd argue that what we're witnessing (and it has actually spawned some decent discussions in several players' threads) is the death of the "hard-man" in the midfield. Control and domination. Control the ball with good possession and control the pitch with good movement off the ball. One will argue that this has always been the case. What has changed is that, for a good 15 years now, more and more teams subscribe to the trend (advocated by both Pep and Klopp) that domination, no matter the philosophy, should be achieved in the opposition third. This has ultimately led to a new crop of players with a wide set of skills who are being preferred for the midfield roles.
Mount is a good signing for United. If we take De Jong as the model for what ETH wanted for that LCM role, it's a risky move. He can press, he can pass and he can deliver a killer pass from the half-spaces. Plus, he's an adequate ball-carrier and he possesses the skill-set to wriggle out of a tight spot without constantly losing the ball, which is a rarity in this United side.
If there's one difference between United and what the rest of the competition is trying to implement (and we still have to wait and see how the team will play next season), one could argue that the others get upgrades to enhance the way their midfield as a whole while Mount seems like an attempt to strike the right balance by adding and subtracting qualities. On the ball, he can be the yin to the yang that Bruno and Rashford often thrive in.
For what it's worth, i think Arteta's plan (on paper) is more courageous in terms of high-risk, high reward. But they have last season's foundations to build on, and Rice is an absolutely massive signing for them. It's also a move that fully agrees with what the OP is suggesting. Energy and endless running (as the only qualities in a midfielder) aren't prerequisites any more to balance out the more adventurous positioning that aims to dominate the spaces between the lines in the opponent's half. These things can be achieved via possession and off the ball movement. Possession, not as a means to always seek out the final pass so much, but more as the ability (Pep often puts in nicely) to "see the space". And off the ball movement not as a tool to get on the ball and become a hero, but to open up more options and help the team's shape maintain its balance. Possession and movement off the ball to increase the threat without unsettling the team's equilibrium. This is the endgame at the top of the pyramid nowadays.
It only really works if you have full backs who don't consistently overlap and who are good in midfield. Or at least 1 that is. Or alternatively one full back who can sit and stay as a CB and a CB pushes up.
Bruno is not the profile of midfielder who is disciplined enough in possession. Though he has improved in this regard under ETH. He's a very creative player and to some degree takes too many risks he will lose possession playing in a double 8 role. The difference between him and KDB or Odegaard is they are tidy in possession. Additionally KDB can play a traditional 8 as does Gundogan therefore they are reminiscent through their natural positions as entral midfielders traditionally. I don't think Casemiro, Mount and Bruno is balanced at all. The only way it works is if the managers system caters to the perceived deficiencies.
Of course his line matters. What he was or wasn't in the past is irrelevant. All that matters is how the manager is deploying him on the pitch and he was deployed in a very advanced position under Arteta last year just like Odegaard was and it worked pretty well for them. He played nothing like a DM or even a deep lying midfielder last season. There are literally articles on it like this one.
https://www.skysports.com/amp/footb...tacking-midfielder-under-manager-mikel-arteta
Arsenal for me
Martinez is fast, and we could already have been doing this.
I get the feeling some of you look at 115 Charges FC and get bright ideas. It sounds good on paper, yet we have seen both full backs play this role often during the season, not Martinez.
I‘m thinking Ten Hag has reasons for not playing Martinez there. He has a good shot but almost never gets close to the final third either.
Your last line. You can bet Ten Hag has a plan.
I don‘t think we will be playing like Arsenal/City at all. I believe on the basis of last season and the signings we are after, Ten Hag is going for speed in bringing the ball forward rather than dominating the ball.
Mount is another player who can play a killer pass like Bruno and Eriksen. He is press resistant to some degree, but not an ideal player for a possession style team.
Casemiro is our hard man. Traditionally the midfield hard man has been either the no.6 or no.8.
I don‘t think the hard man concept is dead: it depends on playstyle. The absence of a destroyer may be fine for City, not for most other teams.
Our playstyle next season won‘t look like 115 Charges FC, and it is not an ‚ideal‘ we should be striving for either. It doesn‘t suit us.
There are those who argue City dominated the CL final, while I saw Inter give them a lot of trouble. The stats suggest Inter was the better team.
It seems this is a viable tactic when you play the inverted fullback-come-midfielder, which provides additional support and protection through the deeper positions in the midfield.
I think Martinez could play that inverted fullback supporting midfield role, as he's good on the ball and a good defender.
Obviously this would be robbing Peter to pay Paul, and you'd need to sign another CB. But it could be a move that unlocks the Bruno and Mount combination, while allowing Casemiro to focus on what he does best.
I believe this is the role that Arteta had in mind for Martinez last season.
Honestly it would be us, based on those formations/players.
As I mentioned in the post above, I think Martinez would be ideal for playing that role. Though who you'd replace him with at CB is another issue entirely.
Long story short but that's how I see it. Gundogan is one of the best 8s around, he's good offensively but also effective defensively. Madrid played for years with two 8s in front of a 6. The main point though is that all those clubs had midfield that could keep the ball (and progress it) very very good. I don't think midfield of Casemiro Mount Bruno is anywhere close to that level.
In similar fashion we spent a few years trying to pretend Pogba is the answer for deep midfield. It maters what kind of player you deploy in which position. We tend to ignore 8s and just go for 10s and shoehorn them in midfield wishing for the best. Happened with Pogba, happened with Eriksen (who did surprisingly well), will happen to mount.
By #10 I mean a player who played by default in the most advanced position in midfield.
With Casemiro Bruno Mount It'll work in games we're the dominant side, the games we did well in last season. It'll have problems in games where we're not, the type of games we dropped the most points. It hurts the problem solving area of my brain.
I was talking more about the notion of a physical presence in the midfield whose hassling is important because it evens out the more laissez-faire proclivities of the main creator. I'm not saying that it's completely obsolete, but there's definitely a tendency to move away from it at the highest level.
Casemiro is much more than our hard-man and that's why i mentioned that the traditional positions (the #6, the #8, the #8) aren't good enough to describe the role of a midfielder on the pitch in its full capacity. It's no coincidence that whenever ETH was asked about what Casemiro brings to the table, the thing he focused on (besides the tonnes of experience) is his ability to find the right passes between the lines. How his ability to receive the ball on the half-turn allows the other two midfielders to occupy pockets of space higher up the pitch. Because that's the way we want to play. You could see it by the spaces both Eriksen and Fred were finding themselves, often more advanced than Bruno and closer to the attackers. And with Mount, as the OP suggests, the decision seems to be that we are doubling down on that.
Similarly, some people think that Rice is being bought by Arteta to compensate for a possible Odegaard/Havertz reverse triangle in the midfield. The truth is that, if you describe Rice as a pure #6 (in the traditional term), you're doing the player a huge disservice. Sure, his defensive game is quite impressive. Last season, he led the midfielders PL stats for possession won (334 times, with Rodri being the only other player above 300) and was also the player with the most interceptions (63). To cap it off, he was the best in the Dribbled Past category with the incredible 0.6 p/g (Caicedo and Rodri were at 0.8, Fabinho and Casemiro just above 2, for comparison). But is this the only reason Arteta will spend north of 100 million quid for him? Rice had also 716 progressive carries last season. Only Rodri had more. He was also third in Forward Passes with 607 with only... you guessed it, Rodri and Bruno Fernandes having more forward passes from midfield positions. So much more than a midfield destroyer or a guy who just screens the back-four.
I wasn‘t suggesting Casemiro is just a hard man, he is a very well rounded player. I just have a problem with the statement that the hard man concept is dead. What 115 Charges FC is doing does not mean much to most other top teams imo. We aren‘t all trying to play the same tactics.
Martinez is at his best at lcb, no way we are going to play him at left back.
Regardless of which way ETH wants us to set up, the fact remains that neither Casimiro, nor Bruno or Mount are very good on the ball. And as good as Varane is, he is also not very good on the ball. Dalot and AWB on the ball are as average as they come. Shaw and Martinez will need to help out both the midfield and defence a lot otherwise we won’t see much of the ball. And then hopefully the gk will be good with build up and possession.
So you are telling me we can play Mount on the same line as Casemiro and it will work when Cas needs replacing?
Players can adapt and play different roles but very rarely play different position to the same quality. And I never said he played like a DM he was an 8/ b2b while Partey the deepest.
You're focusing too much on City to prove a point when they are just one of the examples mentioned in the OP. Last time i checked, neither Liverpool nor Arsenal were owned by oil states. But i'll make myself even more clear so that i won't be misunderstood. If ETH plans to deploy a midfield that consists of Casemiro/Bruno/Mount next season, i'm fully behind him. And i won't even care if we finish 4th and/or without a trophy. Why? Because as far as the tactical modernization of United goes, despite its obvious risks, it's the right thing to do. More difficult and demanding also, but a move toward the right direction. Same thing applies to Arteta at Arsenal.
It can work against most teams, but we will continue to get overrun in midfield, and lack control. And when we play someone like City the best we can hope so is a counter attack, because that midfield trio is still lacking.
We needed Mount at 55m with 1 year on his contract for the tactical modernization and not achieving anything significant? What kind of mental gymnastics is that?
What do you mean by tactical modernization? What changes in our tactical setup do you think we will see?
The reason I keep mentioning 115 Charges FC is because many are referring to them when discussing our tactics or future tactics. I think that is misguided.
If this is the plan, and it seems to be, then we seriously need to invest in somebody to come in for Casemiro. He can’t play that role over the season on his own.
Were we overrun in the FA final?
With better energy levels this midfield should work fine. Last season players were knackered and Eriksen doesn‘t have the legs of Mount.
Agreed, after we sort striker and gk situation.
This is why ETH wanted him replaced. If the Qataris come in, don't be surprised if we make a late move for Boateng.
Ten Hag may never do it, highly likely that he won't but its just that the managers do have similarities (they aren't that stylistically similar but have the same broad school of thought) and Licha is even more technical than Stones. It's a possibility but ultimately it depends on the manager's vision, however I think that Lissandro would be more effective if he had the role as compared to our fullbacks primarily because of his passing ability.
How many years a player has left on his contract is irrelevant when the manager of the buying club has decided that said player is his preferred choice for a specific role. We are forking out 55 million pounds for Mount because ETH has settled on him after chasing De Jong for a year.
There aren't any mental gymnastics. There are no guarantees because we can't control how well the teams around us will perform. If Arsenal improve on last season and Liverpool manage to get their act together, there's a good chance that we will end up with zero trophies and battling for fourth. Even with a slightly better points tally. I'm fine with that as long as ETH shows more signs of a side that's able to win matches by attacking in a better fashion by adding more variety to its attacking game than last season. Which, as suggested by the OP, seems to be what most good teams in the PL want to do. Thus, their midfield preferences going into next season.
Similarly, it seems that Arteta is changing Xhaka for Haveretz. A good defensive player gives way for a player who, last season, was second only to Haaland, for runs off the ball in the opposition box and also has the build (long legs) and the technical skills to get first on the ball and beat his man. He opts for more creativity and selfless off the ball movement. Arsenal may win the title or may finish 3rd or 4th. But the aim is clear when it comes to how he sees his team moving forward and building on the things they did well last season.
The same modernization that saw ETH settling on Eiksen in the midfield and refusing to change him, to the Caf's frustration, even if the latter needed an oxygen tank after 60 minutes. The modernization that had whoever played as the third midfielder (Eriksen, Fred, Sabitzer, even McTominay) positioning themselves higher up the pitch and even looking for runs in the box when the forward was dropping deeper. And despite that, and a few odd games where everything that could go wrong went wrong, we finished in the top-four mainly because of our defensive game. With players looking to make runs close to the opposition box. With Eriksen starting most of the games. Meaning that ETH, like a lot of his modern colleagues, believes that good defending is about team coordination, and about players who can "occupy" bigger spaces, on and off the ball, more with their brains and less with their legs. And now we got a player that has both.
I would argue Casemiro has been over-worked in the sense that he is doing the defensive side and the attacking side...which does lead to him running out of energy late in games. I hope for the coming season he will be more of a defensive sitting type player.
Also I feel the whole team is working without a CF...once that position is sorted the roles of everyone around the CF will change and the chaos-ball we are used to seeing might calm down a little.
Also I feel the whole team is working without a CF...once that position is sorted the roles of everyone around the CF will change and the chaos-ball we are used to seeing might calm down a little.
True. But Shaw was one of our best players last season. Don‘t fix what isn‘t fecked.
The thing is for a United fan who I expect to watch us play every week to talk about how by most accounts an improvement on Eriksen at best, is some kind of worth the 55m spent by the pretext of some tactical modernization and winning feck all, while we had Weghorst playing for us half a season, to me is mental gymnastics. And yeah how much a player will eat out of his budget is always important to a manager. And Mount is hardly the last jigsaw of this team who can’t score goals in the manner of a PL top team, nor he will tighten a leaking defense who was on pair with midtable teams.
As I said mental gymnastics. Spend a fortune but at least we hope to add couple of points?
We might as well invested those 55m in the academy and play the likes of Mejbri?
Whether we like it or not, it is ETH's call to make. Of course, he will be judged for it like any other manager in the game. Is it a decision that contains a certain amount of risk? Most definitely. Is it also a tactical move that it's in accordance with what most managers who are worth their salt nowadays are trying to do? That's also true. Arteta is also taking a risk with Havertz, you may say that Klopp is going down that route with Szoboszlai.
Some of the risks will pay off, others won't. But if you don't like the idea behind it, feel free to sharpen your knives. And it's not just Mount. I am pretty sure there are posters who will be ready to jump on Onana's back from the moment he steps on the pitch at OT just to rub it in the manager's face and argue about an "unnecessary allocation of resources" that could have been spent better. They might be truth in what they'll be saying, too. Doesn't change the trend in modern keepers, though.
And yes, the goal is to build on the good things we did last season. Where that attempt will take us, it remains to be seen. And everybody, the manager included, will be evaluated toward the end of the season. We aren't the dominant force on the island any more. It's a fact that there's not just one, but two teams that have a higher ceiling than us under their respective managers. We can't afford a "win the title or get bust" attitude. Go and ask Chelsea, Arsenal or even Liverpool fans how difficult it was to measure progression and determine "what else do they need" when Ferguson was constantly raising the bar and winning the PL every other year for a quarter of a century.
Basically a single DM even in current Arsenal/City system does not work. Its a box midfield with player from defence joining midfield like Zinchenko/Stones but there are other ways of doing this like how Barca work.
One of the winger and invert and become an AM and the full back of that wing can overlap.
Like in your case Mount can play on the RW but actually can move inside and Dalot can play as a Right winger when you have ball in possession.
Mount won the CL. He scores lots of goals for a midfielder. Our defense is fine, we had the most clean sheets.
We were looking for a cm and a replacement for Sabitzer: Mount is both of those things. Well done.