How does Makelele rate in the "Makelele role"?

[B20]

Let's be clear, "the makelele role" is an absolutely barbaric term, spun out of a mythic idea that no one else could ever have held that Madrid midfield together as evidenced by how badly Gravesen and Beckham did it when left.

Nonetheless, let's ask the question - how good was Makelele actually in the defensive midfielder role compared to his peers?

I propose two criteria, to be evaluated separately:

• Defensively, since apparently that is all he was ever really evaluated on
• Overall impact from that position

As for peers, we're talking players like Rijkaard, Souness, Desailly, Dechamps, Davids, Hamann, Mascherano, Vieira, Redondo, Cambiasso, Mauro Silva, Casemiro, Fabinho, Fernandinho, Simeone, Senna.


To be clear, we are looking at deeplying defensive midfielders here, whose primary job was to hold the midfield and shield the defence. Deeplying playmakers like Pirlo, Alonso and Carrick may or may not have had more impact but weren't really defensive midfielders. Players like Keane, Matthaus and Kante may have been great at the defensive part but were more box-to-box than defensive midfielders. Guattuso also is out on account of not being the holding midfielder.

 

[devilish]

No one is more suited for the makalele role then himself

 

[B20]

Defensively: I'd have Desailly and Rijkaard over him. And I honestly don't think there is much in it between him and the likes of Davids, Mascherano and Vieira.

Overall impact: Rijkaard, Souness, Desailly, Davids, Vieira and Redondo are all easy picks ahead of him for pretty much any midfield setup.

 

[Skills]

Are we including Busquets in the discussion?

 

[B20]

Are we including Busquets in the discussion?

I was unsure. He is a bit of a borderline case between the deeplying playmakers and defensive holding midfielder. Give it a go and see how it pans out.

 

[JPRouve]

Defensively: I'd have Desailly and Rijkaard over him. And I honestly don't think there is much in it between him and the likes of Davids, Mascherano and Vieira.

Overall impact: Rijkaard, Souness, Desailly, Davids, Vieira and Redondo are all easy picks ahead of him for pretty much any midfield setup.

Overall impact and defensively, it's between Deschamps, Redondo and Rijkaard for the first the place.

 

[Skills]

I was unsure. He is a bit of a borderline case between the deeplying playmakers and defensive holding midfielder. Give it a go and see how it pans out.

Of the modern ones (last 20 years) I'd rate them as :

Busquets
Vieira
Makelele = Mascherano (Mascherano was genuinely great, it's a shame he spent so much of his career as a CB).

 

[Siorac]

Are we including Busquets in the discussion?

We should. He was (is?) an excellent passer but his main job wasn't akin to Pirlo's or Carrick's.

 

[B20]

Of the modern ones (last 20 years) I'd rate them as :

Busquets
Vieira
Makelele = Mascherano (Mascherano was genuinely great, it's a shame he spent so much of his career as a CB).

I thought on it and reckon Busquets doesn't fit the discussion on the following criteria:

All the above mentioned peers, a manager could play in a difficult away game against top opposition and feel assuaged that the backline can rest a whole lot easier knowing they have that player in front of them to shield the defence. I don't think Busquets was really that type of player.

 

[JPRouve]

I thought on it and reckon Busquets doesn't fit the discussion on the following criteria:

All the above mentioned peers, a manager could play in a difficult away game against top opposition and feel assuaged that the backline can rest a whole lot easier knowing they have that player in front of them to shield the defence. I don't think Busquets was really that type of player.

If anything Xabi Alonso was a more and better defensive player. But a bit like De Rossi maybe you have them as playmakers?

 

[Rozay]

I think the term was coined, particularly in England, from the fact that no teams played with that player previously. Part of the reason he was so effective here from a tactical perspective, and that was because teams were not set up for it. Teams predominantly lined up with two in midfield, and then he came and was a third man to sit behind.

 

[Skills]

I thought on it and reckon Busquets doesn't fit the discussion on the following criteria:

All the above mentioned peers, a manager could play in a difficult away game against top opposition and feel assuaged that the backline can rest a whole lot easier knowing they have that player in front of them to shield the defence. I don't think Busquets was really that type of player.

Fair. If that's the criteria, Essien might deserve a shout for his performance in the two legs against Barcelona in 2009. They were under a siege and he was massive in helping them hold it.

 

[Ibn Battuta]

This discussion will always be flawed because the genius of Makelele cannot be proven by individual stats or youtube highlights. You have to base yourself on those who watched him play week in week out and have a good memory and more importantly understand football.

Makelele was one of the most incredible players I have seen play. He always knew where he should be and when he should be there. He was always around the dangerous areas to snuff of threats before they developed. His tactical know how and nose for the ball was second to none. And that was his genius. How many times did he not nip dangerous attacks in the but just by being at the right place at the right time. His greatest impact came when he did not touch the ball.
To add to that he almost never had a bad game. It was always high level, no matter the opposition or occasion. Amazing.

It is very sad, but history will always chip away at players like Makelele and elevate players like Ronaldo or those with amazing objective stats. I predicted this, that people will over time forget his genius and even mention him in the same bracket of mediocre players.

 

[Gio]

Can see this debate diverging onto how midfielders are classified between DMs and B2Bs (so for the purposes of this will exclude Keane, Vieira, Tardelli, Dunga, Simeone, Bremner etc). But all of that notwithstanding:

• Defensively, since apparently that is all he was ever really evaluated on
  Top tier - certainly wouldn't underplay how well he defended as his positioning and reading of the game off the ball were as good as it gets. I think he loses out to Desailly and Davids physically, and tactically to Rijkaard because he could drop into CB or sweeper without missing a beat. That said, Makelele's lower centre of gravity arguably gives him an advantage over Rijkaard in dealing with nimble 10s.
• Overall impact from that position - would have him in a broad second tier. The all-rounders in the top tier who could defend and create - Rijkaard, Souness, Redondo, Schweinsteiger, Mackay, Goncalves. But there are a lot of players in that second tier who were comparable defensively, and many who offered more on the ball. From South America, Mauro Silva, Zito, Casemiro, Fernandinho, Clodoaldo, Mascherano, Alvarez, Senna and from Europe Voronin, Luis Fernandez, Deschamps, late career Effenberg (depending how you classify him). But probably not as many from Europe due it producing more box-to-box types rather than the more dedicated DM/AM split that was more common in South America. Again as an outlier, that's probably another reason he became so famous around these parts, alongside the added advantage of exposure of a high-profile career with Real, Chelsea and France.

 

[TheReligion]

Let's be clear, "the makelele role" is an absolutely barbaric term, spun out of a mythic idea that no one else could ever have held that Madrid midfield together as evidenced by how badly Gravesen and Beckham did it when left.

Nonetheless, let's ask the question - how good was Makelele actually in the defensive midfielder role compared to his peers?

I propose two criteria, to be evaluated separately:

• Defensively, since apparently that is all he was ever really evaluated on
• Overall impact from that position

As for peers, we're talking players like Rijkaard, Souness, Desailly, Dechamps, Davids, Hamann, Mascherano, Vieira, Redondo, Cambiasso, Mauro Silva, Casemiro, Fabinho, Fernandinho, Simeone, Senna.


To be clear, we are looking at deeplying defensive midfielders here, whose primary job was to hold the midfield and shield the defence. Deeplying playmakers like Pirlo, Alonso and Carrick may or may not have had more impact but weren't really defensive midfielders. Players like Keane, Matthaus and Kante may have been great at the defensive part but were more box-to-box than defensive midfielders. Guattuso also is out on account of not being the holding midfielder.

I may have misinterpreted you here but are you suggesting Beckham played that role for Madrid? I thought he was on the right hand side of a three man set up. Certainly not a DM anyway.

 

[Daydreamer]

Defensively, since apparently that is all he was ever really evaluated on

Rijkaard was before my time, so for me only Desailly matched him at the base of midfield defensively. I don’t think Mascherano’s time at CB disqualifies him from comparison as the role was still remarkable similar considering how Barca played. I think that is a very close match up as well.

Overall impact from that position

His impact on our league was huge because, as Rozay said, no one really played that way. I was in school when he was at Chelsea and he made holding midfielder a position that kids wanted to play. I also think he was a large part of the prioritisation of specialists at the base of midfield instead of the tip. This has lead to the phasing out of pure 10s and a dearth of quality all-round midfielders.

Even stranger, this contributed to the eventual move away from the Makelele role as creativity is required from ever deeper positions. So we have the likes of De Bruyne, Odegaard and Silva (both of them) playing in central midfield, with the likes of Rodri, Partey and Fabinho behind them. AMs became CMs. CMs became DMs. Zinchenko and Alexander-Arnold have found their place in defence.

I wonder if we will ever see a purely defensive player in a top side’s midfield again in the next few years?

 

[Melbourne Red]

Tell you who was great in the Makelele position? Yer ma.

 

[GlasgowCeltic]

would anyone have Gilberto Silva in or around these lists

 

[Melbourne Red]

Can see this debate diverging onto how midfielders are classified between DMs and B2Bs (so for the purposes of this will exclude Keane, Vieira, Tardelli, Dunga, Simeone, Bremner etc). But all of that notwithstanding:

• Defensively, since apparently that is all he was ever really evaluated on
  Top tier - certainly wouldn't underplay how well he defended as his positioning and reading of the game off the ball were as good as it gets. I think he loses out to Desailly and Davids physically, and tactically to Rijkaard because he could drop into CB or sweeper without missing a beat. That said, Makelele's lower centre of gravity arguably gives him an advantage over Rijkaard in dealing with nimble 10s.
• Overall impact from that position - would have him in a broad second tier. The all-rounders in the top tier who could defend and create - Rijkaard, Souness, Redondo, Schweinsteiger, Mackay, Goncalves. But there are a lot of players in that second tier who were comparable defensively, and many who offered more on the ball. From South America, Mauro Silva, Zito, Casemiro, Fernandinho, Clodoaldo, Mascherano, Alvarez, Senna and from Europe Voronin, Luis Fernandez, Deschamps, late career Effenberg (depending how you classify him). But probably not as many from Europe due it producing more box-to-box types rather than the more dedicated DM/AM split that was more common in South America. Again as an outlier, that's probably another reason he became so famous around these parts, alongside the added advantage of exposure of a high-profile career with Real, Chelsea and France.

No one knows more about football than Gio. Great stuff.

I had no idea Andriy Voronin or Goncalves from Sporting were defensive midfielders but I've just learned.

 

[Melbourne Red]

Good touch for a big man. Light on his feet.

 

[Abraxas]

Never understood the reluctance to call Carrick a defensive midfielder. If he wasn't the defensive contributor in most of the midfields he played in then who was? I don't think you have to be constantly biting into tackles. I think whether you can be classed among these types of players depends on whether you were the main defensive contributor or not, not whether you were also good at passing and building play. All the players listed are different in their own ways so there isn't total consistency anyway.

 

[Irwin99]

Davids and Vieira were more classic box to box midfielders for me- Vieria had Petit and Gilberto Silva to help defensively and Davids had Deschamps at Juve. Davids didn't get many goals I think but he could affect play everywhere. Ince was another who was (when focused) excellent at screening the defence but was also excellent breaking forward.

Classic DMs have probably always existed but sometimes i think the 'Makelele role' was one part praise and another part criticism; in the 90s the best midfielders were expected to do everything to a high standard and then along comes somebody in England who just kills it in one specific role. And he was outstanding at it...Jose called him Chelsea's player of the season in his first year and I think that was the season where they only conceded 15 goals.

 

[André Dominguez]

Coming up next: How does Pelé rate in the nº10 role.

 

[harms]

No one is more suited for the makalele role then himself

But what about Makélélé? Seriously, this is the most annoying misspelling ever. It doesn’t even sound like it, I really have no idea where the second “a” comes from.

Mascherano is a good comparison. Generally I put him in the broad second tier of defensive midfielders like Deschamps, Mascherano, M. Silva, Dunga, Casemiro, Zito… (I’m excluding ball-winning box-to-box players like Davids, Tigana, Kanté & Keane). And personally I’d take Deschamps over him. If we count more playmaking defensive midfielders, I’d also take X. Alonso and, obviously, Busquets, ahead of him.

Redondo did the same job for Madrid, balancing an incredibly light-weight midfield, with the additional bonus of being amazing on the ball. Rijkaard possessed technical and physical qualities that Makélélé could only dream of. Voronin is my personal favorite oldie, again, uniquely gifted in every department. Desailly was better on the ball and had a physical edge over pretty much anyone, including Makélélé, although he often played at CB.

The entire existence of “Makélélé role” is a bit of a farce due to how tactically outdated Premier League was compared to top continental leagues. He was world-class in it, obviously, but not good enough to become a poster boy for all defensive midfielders that came before and after him.

 

[harms]

Purely defensively for an anchor role in in a counter-attacking 4-3-3 I’d probably pick Rijkaard, Desailly, Voronin & Deschamps ahead of him. Maybe Redondo too, but it’s getting to hard to pick anyone while forgetting about the gap in quality in other areas. I’d also think about Casemiro, he had been immense in the same balancing role for long enough.

Players excluded due to being less of DMs and more of B2Bs: Davids, Vieira, Keane, Kanté, Tigana.

 

[JPRouve]

But what about Makélélé? Seriously, this is the most annoying misspelling ever. It doesn’t even sound like it, I really have no idea where the second “a” comes from.

Mascherano is a good comparison. Generally I put him in the broad second tier of defensive midfielders like Deschamps, Mascherano, M. Silva, Dunga, Casemiro, Zito… (I’m excluding ball-winning box-to-box players like Davids, Tigana, Kanté & Keane). And personally I’d take Deschamps over him. If we count more playmaking defensive midfielders, I’d also take X. Alonso and, obviously, Busquets, ahead of him.

Redondo did the same job for Madrid, balancing an incredibly light-weight midfield, with the additional bonus of being amazing on the ball. Rijkaard possessed technical and physical qualities that Makélélé could only dream of. Voronin is my personal favorite oldie, again, uniquely gifted in every department. Desailly was better on the ball and had a physical edge over pretty much anyone, including Makélélé, although he often played at CB.

The entire existence of “Makélélé role” is a bit of a farce due to how tactically outdated Premier League was compared to top continental leagues. He was world-class in it, obviously, but not good enough to become a poster boy for all defensive midfielders that came before and after him.

It's better than Mpabbe or all the variants of Ballon d'Or.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

In fairness the balloon door is a nightmare.

 

[devilish]

But what about Makélélé? Seriously, this is the most annoying misspelling ever. It doesn’t even sound like it, I really have no idea where the second “a” comes from.

Mascherano is a good comparison. Generally I put him in the broad second tier of defensive midfielders like Deschamps, Mascherano, M. Silva, Dunga, Casemiro, Zito… (I’m excluding ball-winning box-to-box players like Davids, Tigana, Kanté & Keane). And personally I’d take Deschamps over him. If we count more playmaking defensive midfielders, I’d also take X. Alonso and, obviously, Busquets, ahead of him.

Redondo did the same job for Madrid, balancing an incredibly light-weight midfield, with the additional bonus of being amazing on the ball. Rijkaard possessed technical and physical qualities that Makélélé could only dream of. Voronin is my personal favorite oldie, again, uniquely gifted in every department. Desailly was better on the ball and had a physical edge over pretty much anyone, including Makélélé, although he often played at CB.

The entire existence of “Makélélé role” is a bit of a farce due to how tactically outdated Premier League was compared to top continental leagues. He was world-class in it, obviously, but not good enough to become a poster boy for all defensive midfielders that came before and after him.

I misspelled that while sitting on a tiny chair in a rather boring familiarisation visit at my daughter's class (with twelve four year old children screaming all over the place). So I think that I deserve some slack

However I do agree with your post. I was never a big fan of the 'enforcer' role myself. In my opinion its a limited role for a limited player (whether technically or mentally wise). Its a waste of position as it offers next to nothing going forward and is there merely to cover the defence's arse. If I remember well Sir Alex said something within those lines as well. I would never put Makelele at the same category of the likes of Keane, Davids or Ince let alone the likes of Rijkaard or Lothar Matthäus

 

[FriedClams]

This is like asking how does David Schwimmer rate in the Ross Gellar role.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Casemiero is the only one since that has the similar pedigree. But I rate peak Makelele as a better defensive shield. Madrid (latest CL winning version) would often get by despite being ropey as feck defensively.



Fabinho is a better passer but nowhere near as good defensively (good but not special). Fernandinho is too different.

As far as pure DMs go he was the best. But I'd rather have one in my team that has other qualities.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

This is like asking how does David Schwimmer rate in the Ross Gellar role.

correct

 

[harms]

I misspelled that while sitting on a tiny chair in a rather boring familiarisation visit at my daughter's class (with twelve four year old children screaming all over the place). So I think that I deserve some slack

Oh, it’s not just you, otherwise I wouldn’t be so frustrated (and my frustration isn’t directed at you). It’s one of the most common misspellings in football and I just can’t understand why — it’s not like it’s a Vieira situation when the second “i” is almost silent or the weird transliterations of Slavic hissing sounds like with Szczęsny. It’s the most straight-forward spell it as it sounds name that you can have.

 

[MadDogg]

Let's be clear, "the makelele role" is an absolutely barbaric term, spun out of a mythic idea that no one else could ever have held that Madrid midfield together as evidenced by how badly Gravesen and Beckham did it when left.

Nonetheless, let's ask the question - how good was Makelele actually in the defensive midfielder role compared to his peers?

I propose two criteria, to be evaluated separately:

• Defensively, since apparently that is all he was ever really evaluated on
• Overall impact from that position

As for peers, we're talking players like Rijkaard, Souness, Desailly, Dechamps, Davids, Hamann, Mascherano, Vieira, Redondo, Cambiasso, Mauro Silva, Casemiro, Fabinho, Fernandinho, Simeone, Senna.


To be clear, we are looking at deeplying defensive midfielders here, whose primary job was to hold the midfield and shield the defence. Deeplying playmakers like Pirlo, Alonso and Carrick may or may not have had more impact but weren't really defensive midfielders. Players like Keane, Matthaus and Kante may have been great at the defensive part but were more box-to-box than defensive midfielders. Guattuso also is out on account of not being the holding midfielder.

Not sure why you include Vieira but not Carrick or Keane, both of whom are more suitable IMO. Vieira spent the majority of his career playing next to a more specialised defensive midfielder (a 'Makelele') and from memory struggled when he didn't have that protection, whereas both Keane and Carrick normally were the main defensive man themselves. Not necessarily saying that I would include them in your list, but they are comfortably ahead of Vieira in that aspect. A younger Keane was more like a Gattuso or Kante style box-to-box player (obviously better on the ball though), but as he aged he became more defensive and more suitable to being included in this thread.

Similar with putting Carrick in the same category with Pirlo and, to a lesser extent, Alonso. He often gets compared to them and Scholes which is a real testament to his playmaking ability (although obviously he wasn't as good as them at it), but he actually played a different position. They all played next to somebody else who tended to do more of the defensive work, whereas Carrick was the one doing that defensive work himself. It's why he and Scholes had so much success together, and he would also have been a very good partner for Pirlo and Alonso. I'm perhaps being a bit harsh on Alonso as he was obviously better at the defensive side than Pirlo and Scholes and could do a decent-ish job there, but he wasn't somebody I would want to build a successful team around as the sole defensive midfielder game-in game-out. Whereas Carrick was playing that role for us during the most successful period in our clubs history. His defensive positioning was absolutely first class.

In pure defensive ability, I'm not sure any are as good as Makelele (although admittedly I didn't watch the older ones). Since that is what was desperately needed in an otherwise very attacking Real Madrid side, there's none that I could comfortably say would be able to slot into his position for them. I'd say the more all-round players would have been better for Chelsea though since they were very solid throughout the team.

 

[devilish]

Oh, it’s not just you, otherwise I wouldn’t be so frustrated (and my frustration isn’t directed at you). It’s one of the most common misspellings in football and I just can’t understand why — it’s not like it’s a Vieira situation when the second “i” is almost silent or the weird transliterations of Slavic hissing sounds like with Szczęsny. It’s the most straight-forward spell it as it sounds name that you can have.

fair enough

I apologise for my mistake.

 

[JPRouve]

fair enough

I apologise for my mistake.

Now I'm sad for you. Harms is way too mean.

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

Rijkaard was before my time, so for me only Desailly matched him at the base of midfield defensively. I don’t think Mascherano’s time at CB disqualifies him from comparison as the role was still remarkable similar considering how Barca played. I think that is a very close match up as well.



His impact on our league was huge because, as Rozay said, no one really played that way. I was in school when he was at Chelsea and he made holding midfielder a position that kids wanted to play. I also think he was a large part of the prioritisation of specialists at the base of midfield instead of the tip. This has lead to the phasing out of pure 10s and a dearth of quality all-round midfielders.

Even stranger, this contributed to the eventual move away from the Makelele role as creativity is required from ever deeper positions. So we have the likes of De Bruyne, Odegaard and Silva (both of them) playing in central midfield, with the likes of Rodri, Partey and Fabinho behind them. AMs became CMs. CMs became DMs. Zinchenko and Alexander-Arnold have found their place in defence.

I wonder if we will ever see a purely defensive player in a top side’s midfield again in the next few years?

What the hell do you consider Casemiro then? He’s about as pure of a DM as you find.

 

[Foxbatt]

Rijkaard is an odd one. I have seen him play a fair bit and he is as good as in defense as in midfield. He is fairly quick too. According to Johan Cruijff, he could play in any outfield position.
When played as a midfield player he doesn't play as a strict defensive or holding midfield player.

 

[Okey]

In the modern era, I'd have Busquets above anyone. I've covered him all his career. His impact is a bit diluted by his being a bit of a cnut. He's been more than phenomenal in that role.

 

[harms]

Rijkaard is an odd one. I have seen him play a fair bit and he is as good as in defense as in midfield. He is fairly quick too. According to Johan Cruijff, he could play in any outfield position.
When played as a midfield player he doesn't play as a strict defensive or holding midfield player.

He played in multiple roles throughout his career. A creative box-to-box during his first spell at Ajax, mainly controlling the tempo and sending van Basten through to goal with wonderful vertical passing; a defensive box-to-box at Milan next to a less mobile playmaker in Ancelotti in a 4-4-2; a pure holder in van Gaal's revolutionary 3-1-2-1-3. Not to mention his spells at CB which includes the triumphant Euro 88' campaign where he played next to Ronald Koeman in the oddest centre-back pairing you'll ever see.

So yeah, you can really play him anywhere and he'd give you 8/10 performance, but generally it's fair to say that he had spent a lot of his career prioritizing defense over offense, hence why he gets included in the list of defensive midfielders.

 

[General_Elegancia]

In terms of pure destroying skills, I would put Makelele on one of the tops of the list. Destroying skill in my criteria isn't only limited to the purely defensive midfielder, it could be some kind of midfielders like defensive b2b like Roy Keane, Tigana, Edgar Davids or Kante, Mackay or balance b2b like Tardelli, Bremner, and Robson or even someone who didn't have real footages or 90 minutes to show how great they were like Luis Monti or Obdulio Valera.

In terms of pure defensive phase, he's still on the top of my list but he's not the best of all time. In this department, Rijkaard edged him in terms of physical department like strength and aerial ability and in terms of the tactical approach he still edged Makelele. Desailly was a person who could play at center-back, he was solid as a rock, had great discipline and was better in aerial ability than Makelele. Voronin was also considered and rated as a top player in this department and I think overall he still edged Makelele too. Other players who had cases being better than him were Dave Mackay, Casemiro, Mauro Silva and maybe Dunga ( Kante was more of a b2b, so I wouldn't count on him).


In terms of overall impact, he wasn't at the top of the list for sure. Rijkaard, Redondo, Souness, b2b/dm version of Beckenbauer, Golcaves and maybe Toninho Cerezo had shown the world for many years how skillful dm/defensive b2b could be an important factor for their teams, all of them showed exceptional ball-playing skills, could pass on an elite level and had shown some nice composure on the ball. In terms of being on the top in this regard, you must have great technique, composure on the ball, tactical approaches, a great understanding of the game and can evaluate teammates plus you must have great enough in the defensive department. Makelele was no mug on the ball, but he was a bit limited player and couldn't step up in the level of greatness in the game.