How Are They Different: Defensive Midfielder, Holding Midfielder, Deep Lying Playmaker & Pivot?

Yeah, at one time you only heard it applied as 'two man pivot' in 4-2-3-1, as you say.

Arsenal examples:
Defensive Midfielder: Gilberto
Holding Midfielder: Arteta
Deep Lying Playmaker: Xhaka(at Borussia Mochengladbach, I don't know whats his role at Arsenal)
Pivot: Arteta - Song combination.

Disagree.

Defensive (oriented) midfielder is a broad term. Someone like Kante who does defensive work and can be utilized further away from the area in front back line. His job is to press either win the ball further up, breaking up play or at least guided opposition's play into the trap. He is a b2b midfielder. He can leave some area on the pitch unprotected which a holding midfielder needs to monitor.

Pivot is more or an action. It is equivalent to holding (the midfield)

Let's enter my brain.

A deep-lying playmaker spends a lot of his time near the defenders and rarely organizes the game in the opposing half. That is why, I would consider Busquets or late Xabi Alonso or Pirlo as deep-lying playmakers.

Of course, a player like Xavi is complete but in my world he's a central midfielder who runs the show all over the pitch. He was sometimes deployed by Spain as a #10 and I wouldn't expect Xabi Alonso and Busquets to do that job.

Iniesta and Xavi are similar players, one is certainly more attacking than the other but they fulfill the same tasks IMO

(A) deep-lying playmakers: say Pirlo with Italy in 2006
(B) central midfielders: Verratti, Xavi...
(C) Advanced playmakers or #10: Zidane and co

Of course, the distinction isn't so clear: Vieira 2006 isn't Vieira 2000 for instance

You just need to add Vieira as a B2B

Deep-lying playmaker: #6 with top passing skills (long and short) and a limited physical impact. Term loved by hipsters
Destroyer: #6 with average/poor passing skills and a strong physical impact
B2B: runs runs runs a lot in both ways. Straight-forward approach based on stamina and aggresivity.
Central Midfielder: complete defensive midfielder, playmaking skills and ability to set the tempo. Contrary to a #10, a poor impact in the final third. Doesn't score a lot and has limited dribbling skills.

Pivot is a word.

All it's meant historically is the positions on the pitch that allow the team to switch (pivot) from defence to attack and make that transition beneficial to the team.

Read something in depth in relation to Italian (my pick) coaching. Every position on the pitch has a name. Varieties of principle positions have different names.

Italian football has a beauty of description that makes everything clear and easy.

For some reason, English football is very resistant to changes of terminology. We desperately cling onto absolute definitions of positions and new phrases take decades to take hold. When a new one comes along we have an urge for it to be an absolute term. It's stupid.

Pivot is a term that's used in a computer game and now seems to be used widely as a descriptor of position rather than role. Even if we grudgingly accept the term, we shouldn't use it as a means to label a specific player.

To be fair mate, Nobody does.

This is probably the best way to do categories but it leaves out one playstyle that Jonathan Wilson talks about here
https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2013/dec/18/question-holding-midfielders-changing-role

Its really not hard. Using United players...

defensive midfielder - Butt, Schneiderlin, Keane, Matic
Box to Box - Keane, Fletcher, Pogba
holding midfielder - Carrick, Keane, Matic
deep lying playmaker - Carrick
pivot - basically the one or two midfielders sitting in front of the back four.

Notice how adaptable Keane was

Defensive midfielder: primarily a spoiler across the whole of the middle third when his team doesn't have the ball, eg. Essien

Holding midfielder: never strays more than 30 yards from his centrebacks primarily in order to block runs and intercept, thereby 'holding' position in 'midfield', eg. Carrick

Deep lying playmaker: sits as deep as a holding midfielder, but his primary sense is to be in a position to receive from the ball from any of his teammates in order to control the tempo of their passing, eg. Pirlo

Being a pivot is an instruction from your manager, rather than a natural playing style. You sit back/bomb forward as and when you're told you should do so, eg. any midfielder who's asked to do it. Could be anyone.

Obviously, there's a fair amount of overlap between these roles. But that's the explanation in broad brush strokes.

Football was once a simple game, then Football Manager was invented .

Well, i hear those terms a lot among european fans. I confess that i dont think these nuances define a different position.

In Brazil we call the player with main defensive duties a "primeiro volante"(DM). So it can be Casemiro, a player like Kante who is everywhere, or Pirlo, he still the primeiro volante(DM). So its about the place in the pitch where he will start more than his style.

‘Defensive Midfielder’ and ‘deep-lying playmaker’ are probably the two most common terms used to describe a player’s playing style/ attitude/ strengths, more so than playing position. ‘Holding midfielder’ does not imply anything beyond playing position. ‘Pivot’ isn’t a word I’ve seen used with regard to individual players, but I’ve seen it used when outlining a team’s formation (specifically, detailing use of a single or double pivot in midfield).

Holding midfielder, sitting midfielder, anchorman - the vast majority of sides use a single player designated to stay in that position in front of the defence, particularly in possession (as it is common for midfield teammates to position themselves on the same line when defending but advance as attacking play progresses forward). The descriptions are clear - the player holds/ sits/ anchors the midfield. Simples. Seeing the terms used and accompanying definitions in the OP, all the ‘types’ of players described are holding midfielders and their various strengths and abilities are a separate discussion.

Most broadly, players could be categorised as silky or gritty. To what extent a player falls in one group obviously differs from one player to the next, but on the whole even those who are seen as complete tend to fit one description more than the other.

Defensive midfielder, destroyer, workhorse, water carrier - these terms imply certain qualities and inclinations but it does not necessarily accurately indicate playing position. One could easily be talking about Makelele, Mascherano, Keane, Essien, Vieira, Hargreaves or Khedira - some were/ are holding players, some box to box and some proficient at both/ either.

Similarly deep-lying playmaker, regista, dictator, metronome are labels given to players such as Pirlo, Xavi, Xabi Alonso, Modric - again some of which who were holding players and some box to box (in a positional sense rather than stylistically).

I think confusion with these terms comes from the fact that titles like ‘defensive midfielder’ and ‘deep-lying playmaker’ are not defined roles on a football park, they are adjectives used to describe players, and yet are often used as such. Two people can be conversing using these terms while actually referring to different things and points get misinterpreted.

Good explanation.

Why has no one mentioned the elephant?

Elephant: Pogba - he plays equally shite and majestic in equal measure. A midfielder, who does most of his good work away from midfield.

Pivot? Stay in that box!

Only thing this thread tells me is that no one knows what the feck kind of midfielder Scholes was.

Also a pet peeve of mine. Guys like Modric, Verratti, Thiago, Scholes from 2006-2013 and Xavi from 2008-2013 would not fit into any of these categories. They were not defensive midfieldes or even deep lying playmakers. They are/were simply midfield playmaker types.

Shivot : Rodrigo Possebom

I would call them registas or yup basically as you put it proper centre midfield playmakers or maestros.

Definitely in a category all of their own.

Well what people do is combine what he was in his younger days and what he became once his legs went. He started off as a second striker, than as an attacking midfielder and then settled into a regista/CM playmaker. He was never all these things all at the same time.

Regista is a more aggressive DLP, an Italian term. does not suit any of the ones from the post you quoted.

Agreed. Area on the pitch just in front of the defence and if you go double pivot it means you want two guys ahead of the defence.

What type of players you want on there can vary and that is when you look at all the roles we've all been discussing in this thread.

The way I usually look at it is a DM is more of a guy who runs around and makes tackles. He breaks up the play with is energy and tackling. Think of players like Kante or in the past, Gattuso. While a holding midfielder is more of a guy who sits in space in front of the 2 centre halves. He doesn't necessarily go lunging into tackles, but he's more of a guy who is disciplined and holds space to slow down a counter attack and make interceptions. Think of players like Carrick and Alonso. Your deep lying play maker is typically a guy who plays as either of those roles, but is your first route of attack when you get in possession. Again, think of guys like Carrick, Alonso and then also Pirlo. Not quite sure what a pivot is...

Yep but I've always disliked the Italian interpretation as it makes it too subtle and nuanced. It's such a great term but the way the Italians would use it, barely anyone would ever get defined as a regista.

Currently the game is missing a fancy Latin derived defined term for guys like Xavi, Modric, Thiago, Verratti or say latter day Scholes. I'd like to see them defined as a regista but agree with you that strictly speaking I'm wrong.

This is a really good post, especially the last paragraph. You will very rarely find any midfield player that only fits in one of these "boxes". One thing I find strange is when people do up their little "best team" formations outlining the players who need to fit the roles of "holding midfielder", "box to box" and "number 10", as if any combination of players who fit into each category will be the perfectly balanced midfield.

Each player has their own characteristics and finding an appropriate combination that best complement each other is more important than finding players that fit nicely into these "positions".

For example, in a midfield 2, Pogba and Keane would be an outstanding combination. Keane could dictate the tempo from deep, had the athleticism and reading of the game to allow Pogba to get forward more but also would keep him on his toes defensively and give him an absolute bollocking if he overplayed on the ball or failed to track runners. Pogba would provide the creativity and goal threat that Keane lacked.

But Pogba and Carrick or Pogba and Fellaini were poor combinations because Carrick and Fellaini lack the athleticism to cover the ground when Pogba gets caught forward and Fellaini is poor on the ball.

Herrera is a good all round player with tactical intelligence which makes him an ideal player to complete a midfield because he can complement different types of midfield players. He could fit into any of the "holding midfielder", "box to box" and "number 10" boxes but you wouldn't call him a specialist in any of them.

What makes Pogba such a special talent is that he holds more attributes of every midfield role than any player I have seen. He has speed, power, athleticism, a good tackler, can dribble, pass, link play, shoot, make late runs into the box and is good in the air. He has the skill set of the perfect central midfield player. All he seems to lack is the mentality.

He was the deep lying play maker too.

I also cringe when guys like Vidal and Keita are referred to as defensive midfielders. They are obvious box to box midfielders. Also the likes of Kante and prime Gattuso are/were not really defensive midfielders either they are ball winning midfielders.

Winning the ball is a defensive action as it is stopping the opposition and recovering the ball for the more creative players. I don't think it's an inaccurate description for Kante or Gattuso.

The Milan midfield was a real anomaly at the time. It was one of the first times I can remember where the defensive midfield players (Gattuso/Ambrosini) played in advance of the more creative player (Pirlo).

I came here to make fun of nerds but you've dissuaded me. Great post nerd.