Sam Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 Watching these last two games as well as previous Canada matches I'm starting to think Canada has been approaching the issue of centre midfield the wrong way. If we're playing a 4-3-3 that leaves us with three centre midfield spots to fill and we have a plethora of different options. There is Johnson, De Guzman, Hutchinson, Bernier, Dunfield, Pacheco. All of whom have played in these three centre midfield roles over the past few matches. We tend to opt for De Guzman, Hutchinson and Johnson as our starting three midfielders, and based on skill alone it would be hard to argue against the trio. But that midfield didn't look great against Peru, and it hasn't looked great in games where we need to take the match to our opposition like the Gold Cup game last year against Honduras where we just didn't press the Hondurans and failed to score despite having most of the possession. When those three guys Johnson, De Guzman and Hutchinson play in the centre of midfield we keep the ball well, but we don't press there is no urgency, the ball gets played around in the middle third of the park until we lose it and then we drop back. With Dunfield, Johnson and Bernier in Montreal we did not keep that same possession, but the midfield trio played further up the pitch, they weren't afraid to go in for a tackle and when they got the ball it was moved forward quickly. From their the wingers and centre forward launched an attack. Despite having less skill going forward in the centre of midfield for the Honduras game we posed way more of a threat on the counter with Simpson and Jackson finding themselves in 1v1 situations. The problem on the other hand though is we clearly can't drop arguably our two most technically gifted players in Hutchinson and De Guzman. But I think we may have seen a solution to this as well in Montreal and in Hutchinson's play as a winger with PSV. He is better going forward, stick him on the wing and see how he does. Put him up front with Simpson and Jackson see how the trio do. All three of them are speedy and have a bit of creativity, maybe instead of playing with two wingers and a forward the three of them would interchange positions and create a more free flowing attack. Then stick De Guzman in the centre of midfield with two workhorses. I really think Canada's midfield has been dominated by silky, possession-oriented players over the past whereas it needs a few more grind-it-out, get stuck in, type of players. Bernier, Dunfield, Pacheco and maybe even a Nik Ledgerwood could slot in there to give Canada's midfield a bit of drive. A no - nonsense get the ball forward quickly type of midfielder. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonovision Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 Good post, just a minor correction: Hutchinson hasn't played as a winger yet with PSV, and given the talent they have at those positions, I would be surprised if he did. He has played mostly in central midfield, and this weekend filled in at right back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted September 12, 2010 Author Share Posted September 12, 2010 Good post, just a minor correction: Hutchinson hasn't played as a winger yet with PSV, and given the talent they have at those positions, I would be surprised if he did. He has played mostly in central midfield, and this weekend filled in at right back. Okay I just saw the cross he put in for the goal this weekend and assumed it was from the right hand side of midfield, but I guess it was from right back. Hutch did play in an attacking midfield role in Denmark so I have no worries playing him further up front is what I'm trying to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFCRegina Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 Just going to point out that a gritty midfield will do more to harm than help us in away matches in Central America, especially in the WCQ cycle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 ^ Completely disagree. Palacios, Bradley, Torrado - they did more harm than good for Honduras, USA & Mexico? <Cue broken record> We need one or two of these in our central midfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yomurphy1 Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 I wouldn't mind playing a 4-2-3-1 with Jakovic & de Guzman as D-mids. I think Jakovic's physical presence could really open up the game for de Guzman who struggles against physical competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshieScores Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 Watching these last two games as well as previous Canada matches I'm starting to think Canada has been approaching the issue of centre midfield the wrong way. If we're playing a 4-3-3 that leaves us with three centre midfield spots to fill and we have a plethora of different options. There is Johnson, De Guzman, Hutchinson, Bernier, Dunfield, Pacheco. All of whom have played in these three centre midfield roles over the past few matches. I agree. Our strength is still in the midfield and we have to utilize those player that fits the tactical setup. Unfortunately 4-3-3 is not the way to go in my opinion and I believe we need 4 midfielder setup with true holding skills in the defensive role. However as we saw in particular in the Honduras match, we had committed way to many fouls and adding combative / physical players into the starting lineup with likes of Dunfield and Bernier could do more harm than good. I would probably add Pacheco as the holding player as he's shown during Venezuela match that he's got a nice mix of technical skills and composure to link up with the attacking players without being too ambitious. I like to see Deguz on the right side to see if we lessen his defensive responsibilities, perhaps he could be more creative. He's been giving away balls way too easily recently. My preferred startingmidfield would be: Simpson--Hutch--Deguz ---------Pacheco--------- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 ^ Completely disagree. Palacios, Bradley, Torrado - they did more harm than good for Honduras, USA & Mexico? <Cue broken record> We need one or two of these in our central midfield. Ivan and I have been on the same wavelength before in previous discussions about this. A solid, ball winning, big engine player is needed in there to police the counterattack threat from midfield as well as to shut down the likes of Bradley. This would allow DeGuzman to play to his strengths (link up play). A key to the formation we currently play (4-3-3 morphing to 4-5-1, or what have you) is an attacking mid type providing support for the centre forward/striker. In 2007 Hutchinson impressed me in the Venezuela match and subsequent GC with his playmaking instincts. Since that time he has done a lot of different midfield roles at club level and during our ill-fated WCQ you hardly saw him in any offensive position. I definitely think he's a better guy in that role than DeRo, who tends to drift away from the central position in search of 1 v 1s and not provide the attacking support needed (IMO his best position for the NT is on the left flank, as he was at the GC07). I once said we should push Jakovic up one level to play in that holding role in front of the back four, Marquez-style, but I now agree with others (I believe Sam was one of them) that he should stay at the CB spot. But finding someone who can really assert those ball winning defensive qualities will really help us, especially against more physical sides (and yes, the Honduras A list can be a pretty physical midfield, as can be the Ticos). At the last WC every one of the top teams had an appreciation for that kind of player in the middle of the park: some had two, like Holland with van Bommel and De Jong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFCRegina Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 ^ Completely disagree. Palacios, Bradley, Torrado - they did more harm than good for Honduras, USA & Mexico? <Cue broken record> We need one or two of these in our central midfield. I'm talking about the inevitable fouls (real or perceived) which will rack up against a squad with a gritty defensive midfielder. We need someone who can get that ball without causing too many fouls in Central American play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 ^Yes, a guy who's a strong tackler, likes to do it, dishes the ball off to the best pass receiving option available, and doesn't free lance or stray out of position. "Gritty" doesn't mean dirty or illegal to me: it means somebody who likes to get stuck in and can win a 50-50 ball a majority of the time, legally, not a foul machine and red card waiting to happen like Saric or Harmse. I always thought Nsaliwa would be the guy for the job but he chose a different path. Too bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 I think the last few years have shown that JDG is not the offensively creative player we had hoped he would be despite the occassional (and increasingly more rare) flashes of this. I think we need to employ him in the same role he played at Deportivo as a destroying defensive midfielder and give up on the dream of him being our dominant player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youllneverwalkalone Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 ^He dwells on the ball at this level though, something that seemed to be trained out of him at Depor. I think he needs some behind him who moves the ball with urgency (Dunfield, Edgar, etc.) and some one in front of him who can move into the attacking third. I'm not a Dunfield lover based on 1 performance. I just use him (and Johnson for that matter) as a type of player to slot in. Anyway, I haven't made a formation in many years, and 4-4-2 seems to be out for Hart, so let me suggest a 4-1-2-1-2: ---------------Keeper-------------- Straith--McKenna---Jakovic----Klukowski ---------------Dunfield------------------- ----Deguzman------------Hutchinson-- ---------------Johnson------------------ ----Gerba-----------------Occean------- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted September 14, 2010 Author Share Posted September 14, 2010 I'm also not saying Dunfield is the answer after one decent performance. But I agree with YNWA on this one, De Guzman is slow in possession and sometimes slows down Canadian chances for a counter attack. Having someone more direct in there could help the team play a more attacking style like we've seen them play in their best matches over the past three or four years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gator Posted September 15, 2010 Share Posted September 15, 2010 I think the last few years have shown that JDG is not the offensively creative player we had hoped he would be despite the occassional (and increasingly more rare) flashes of this. I think we need to employ him in the same role he played at Deportivo as a destroying defensive midfielder and give up on the dream of him being our dominant player. I've said it before, he had one good tournament (Gold Cup) where he shone offensively, then everyone, maybe himself included expected him to be the next Paul Scholes! I watch this guy week in and week out at TFC and believe me his best role is a destroyer who can start counter attacks from the back! As for a physical presence, I agree we could really use one there maybe in front, or in tandem with JDG! Bernier has been ok in that role at times, he's very inconsistent though! Bircham and Imhoff were good options previously but sadly weren't used a whole lot for various reasons! We need someone to play that role IMO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Could someone give me his definition of what a "destroyer" defensive midfielder is? I guess I define it as a strong tackling sort of guy, not getting knocked over under physical challenges when in possession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpg75 Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Could someone give me his definition of what a "destroyer" defensive midfielder is? I guess I define it as a strong tackling sort of guy, not getting knocked over under physical challenges when in possession. LOL! I agree Bearcat, when i think of "destroyer" i think of someone like Diego Simeone. Julian is a soft D-mid, he uses positioning and timing to defend and not physicality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gator Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Generally the "destroyer" types are bigger more physical players but a guy like JDG can destroy the opposition's attacks by reading the play and being in the proper position to get a good tackle in or sweep up a loose ball! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SthMelbRed Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 ^two of the world's premier 'destroyer' defensive mids over the last decade, Claude Makalele and Javier Mascherano, are actually quite small in stature. Their games are based on positioning, anticipation, reading the play as it develops, and unbelievable work rates; all things that JDG utilised at Depor. While he's nowhere near the caliber of those two players, when used properly, he could be their MLS and CONCACAF equivalent. He doesn't possess their ability to quickly link defense with attack by picking out the simple, short passing option to their offensive-type teammates, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 ^The guy who stood out to me in the way in which you describe is "Cantona's waterboy," Deschamps. All the traits you describe are of a high quality defensive midfielder. But when I hear "destroyer," I think of a far more physical component, kind of like old time Italian great Romeo Benetti or the more latter day Roy Keane (or the jpg75's Simeone example): win a lot of 50/50 balls, yet with a bit of intimidation in the subtext. As for DeGuzman, I guess I didn't see enough of him in Spain because I always felt a strength was his linking passing play to go along with all those other defensive midfield traits you described. I see him in the same way jpg75 describes him. Van Bommel and De Jong for Holland ... definitely destroyers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kj52 Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 ^The guy who stood out to me in the way in which you describe is "Cantona's waterboy," Deschamps. All the traits you describe are of a high quality defensive midfielder. But when I hear "destroyer," I think of a far more physical component, kind of like old time Italian great Romeo Benetti or the more latter day Roy Keane (or the jpg75's Simeone example): win a lot of 50/50 balls, yet with a bit of intimidation in the subtext. As for DeGuzman, I guess I didn't see enough of him in Spain because I always felt a strength was his linking passing play to go along with all those other defensive midfield traits you described. I see him in the same way jpg75 describes him. Van Bommel and De Jong for Holland ... definitely destroyers! I agree Bearcat, I thought from the 6 or 7 games on TV that I watched him play in the second half of his final Spanish season that he was a critical part of Deportivo's amazing run. He linked play extremely well and was involved in nearly every attacking build up. His passing was crisp and accurate and he rarely got caught out of position. He really shone against the top clubs and was an effective though hardly overpowering tackler (just seemed to end up with the ball all the time). I'd love to see him in that role again but it takes skilled teammates to look good as a defensive mid when you're a little guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SthMelbRed Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 As for DeGuzman, I guess I didn't see enough of him in Spain because I always felt a strength was his linking passing play to go along with all those other defensive midfield traits you described. I see him in the same way jpg75 describes him. I will agree with you that he was better in that regard with Depor, but in the national team games I've seen him play and the one TFC match I've seen him in, he's dwelled on the ball for far too long to be effective in that role. It very well may be that he doesn't feel that he has a better player to lay it off to quickly to build the attack so he just holds the ball himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 I will agree with you that he was better in that regard with Depor, but in the national team games I've seen him play and the one TFC match I've seen him in, he's dwelled on the ball for far too long to be effective in that role. It very well may be that he doesn't feel that he has a better player to lay it off to quickly to build the attack so he just holds the ball himself. That goes back to the mentality he may feel that he has to be THE MAN, so to speak, but I'm just guessing. My big problem with his dwelling on the ball, especially in MLS, is how often he has been (too easily) overpowered in the physical department and gets stripped. If he somewhat fought off a 1 v 1 shielding play then simply opted for a square ball or back to defence, that one be different but too often I have seen him (or Hutchinson, for that matter) sitting on his can in a CONCACAF match looking for a foul call that doesn't happen. I'm a big fan of guys who move the ball to the easiest open option, which I will concede somewhat has been easier said than done at TFC with some of the supporting cast suspects on the field. I remember during WCQ for 06 posting that he had to stop thinking he was Patrick Viera out there and stop playing a big man's physical game. When he concentrates on a simple quick passing game, he's an excellent linkman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 ^The guy who stood out to me in the way in which you describe is "Cantona's waterboy," Deschamps. All the traits you describe are of a high quality defensive midfielder. But when I hear "destroyer," I think of a far more physical component, kind of like old time Italian great Romeo Benetti or the more latter day Roy Keane (or the jpg75's Simeone example): win a lot of 50/50 balls, yet with a bit of intimidation in the subtext. As for DeGuzman, I guess I didn't see enough of him in Spain because I always felt a strength was his linking passing play to go along with all those other defensive midfield traits you described. I see him in the same way jpg75 describes him. Van Bommel and De Jong for Holland ... definitely destroyers! We have been agreeing too much lately so I have to disagree with your definition of what a destroyer is! A destroyer as a few others have suggested with their examples is a defensive mid whose main responsibility is to interupt all the attacks of the opposing team. His main effect on the game is negative in the sense he is interfering with the plays, possession and formation of the opposing team, ie. ruining the flow of the game. Of course, since he is ruining the flow of the opposite team this is a positive thing for his team. It is really immaterial how the player disrupts the other team as to whether he is a destroyer or not, physical play is only one of the methods used to do this. When the destroyer wins the ball he will usually make a short pass to another more offensively minded midfielder whose job it is to advance the ball while the destroyer stays back to guard against/ruin any attacks that could result from a turnover. JDG during his Deportivo years was the perfect example of a destroyer who wasn't very physical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 We have been agreeing too much lately so I have to disagree with your definition of what a destroyer is! A destroyer as a few others have suggested with their examples is a defensive mid whose main responsibility is to interupt all the attacks of the opposing team. His main effect on the game is negative in the sense he is interfering with the plays, possession and formation of the opposing team, ie. ruining the flow of the game. Of course, since he is ruining the flow of the opposite team this is a positive thing for his team. It is really immaterial how the player disrupts the other team as to whether he is a destroyer or not, physical play is only one of the methods used to do this. When the destroyer wins the ball he will usually make a short pass to another more offensively minded midfielder whose job it is to advance the ball while the destroyer stays back to guard against/ruin any attacks that could result from a turnover. JDG during his Deportivo years was the perfect example of a destroyer who wasn't very physical. Well I have learned some new vocabulary! And thanks to your definition, as well as the other supporting viewpoints presented here, I have to conclude that we had no destroying midfield presence during the key matches of our last WCQ campaign. We'll probably disagree on that point, too, but I appreciate the respectful tone, nonetheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted September 18, 2010 Share Posted September 18, 2010 Well I have learned some new vocabulary! And thanks to your definition, as well as the other supporting viewpoints presented here, I have to conclude that we had no destroying midfield presence during the key matches of our last WCQ campaign. We'll probably disagree on that point, too, but I appreciate the respectful tone, nonetheless. No I would agree with you on that. In general the only recent player who consistently played that role for us is Imhof as JDG was usually employed in an offensive role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.