Playing two playmakers

Ekeke

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2006
Messages
53,541
Location
Hope, We Lose
You will find there are some players on their teams who are passed the ball as soon as they are open and free for a pass because thats the team's tactics and because that player is trusted and respected in his use of the ball.

Scholes has been this player at United, Silva was this player at Valencia and so on. That's the team's playmaker. The player the team looks to find and play through, not just one of many players who passes the ball well.
 

amolbhatia50k

Sneaky bum time - Vaccination status: dozed off
Joined
Nov 8, 2002
Messages
96,058
Location
india
You will find there are some players on their teams who are passed the ball as soon as they are open and free for a pass because thats the team's tactics and because that player is trusted and respected in his use of the ball.

Scholes has been this player at United, Silva was this player at Valencia and so on. That's the team's playmaker. The player the team looks to find and play through, not just one of many players who passes the ball well.
Agree. That's why I don't think Carrick is one. Apart from their use of the ball, that player is usually gifted on the ball. You pass the ball to Scholes and Xavi knowing that they can deal with any sort of pressing from defenders. You know these guys always have time on the ball.
 

Jens' Face

An Arse
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
1,196
Location
where the Glazers come from
For me a playmaker has to do more than just get forward with the ball.

He has to run a game. Dictate the flow of play and control a game.

Scholes, Fabregas, Silva, Modric, VDV are the ones I would mention from England. Also to some degree Carrick can be this type of player.

Other then that the likes of Xavi, Alonso, Banega, Pizarro all stand out for me.
Not that I would offer this as the definitive way of breaking down playmakers, but it seems like the term should cover at least two types of players.

A lot people in the thread are focusing on attacking midfielders, like Cesc, Oezil, Nasri, etc. That's what I think of first, too: someone who plays up around the box, makes that final pass (or the infamous "pre-assist") and will chip in with some goals as well. A lot of them are almost hybrid midfielders-supporting strikers in the new formations. Kaka was that before he went off the boil. VDV is like that for Tottnumb. That's kind of how I saw Rooney before he was moved up last season to be the target man (and where I still wonder if he's at his most world-classy). Those are all different players, and including Rooney especially, shows that it's hard to draw a firm dividing line.

I would separate out as an entirely different class of player the likes of Pirlo and Alonso and (yeah, I'm pushing this one now) Huddlestone. These folks have been mentioned in the thread too, but less often. I think it's fair to call them playmakers -- why not? -- but a slightly more descriptive term would be something like "midfield general." They hang back, dictate the flow and tempo of the game, manage the team shape. They're certainly capable of playing up around the box and finding the killer pass, but they generally don't, often cause they have someone (say, Kaka for Pirlo or Iniesta for Xavi) who does the work upfield. Folks have suggested Roy Keane as a playmaker. I agree, on the midfield general side of the equation. Because he plays between Huddlestone and VDV, Modric is the best example I can think of a player who is both "advanced playmaker" and "midfield general." Really, I can't say enough about the spurs midfield. Really impressed by their shape.

Finally, I think we might have gotten a little off-track by focusing on individual players (or types of players). It might make sense to look at team tactics first, and see that as the impetus behind multiple playmakers. And here I want to address the OP's question that hasn't gotten much attention yet. With the shift from two strikers up front to a central striker (sometimes even a false nine, who is very much a playmaker), surrounded by flank forwards and attacking midfielders, players' roles have changed. So a player who would once (say, 7 years ago?) have not been seen as a playmaker, now is. Team tactics demand it. The team I know best illustrates this well. Arsenal's first choice midfield and attack is probably:

Wilshere
Song Cesc
Nasri RVP Arshavin -- They all work as playmakers. But this is obviously not just Arsenal. I see Bale and Lennon as playmakers. Madrid and Barca are full of them too, etc. etc.
 

Jens' Face

An Arse
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
1,196
Location
where the Glazers come from
In fairness Song has improved extremely in being more creative and getting forward, especially for someone who was a CB
nothing to do with the playmaker question, but just want to address what I see as a factual error.

Song's original role for Arsenal was in the midfield. Then AW got it into his head that he was gonna make him a cb. Song played there on occasion, either in the Carling Cup or as a replacement for injured cbs. But over the same period, he also played in cm. At the end of the 2008-9 season, I think because of injuries in midfield, Song got an extended run at dm. Then when last season started (his real break-out season), Diaby was injured (of course) so Song started at dm again. (Pretty sure Wenger had Diaby pegged for the role, in hindsight maybe a mistake well-avoided?) Last season, Song claimed the (harrying as opposed to shielding) dm role and now he's clearly first-choice there.

It's interesting to speculate on why AW changed his mind about Song -- my sense is that he didn't trust his stamina before, but now he does, but that's just a digression.

The point is: Song went from dm to potential-cb and back to dm. But it's probably incorrect to say he was ever really primarily a cb.
 

Nani Nana

Full Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
5,753
Supports
Whoever won the game
Good good post Jens, I may not agree but it's well thought through.

To me a playmaker is defined by two things among others : not participating to defensive work and setting the tempo in a team. If he starts playing with one or two touches then his attacking partners shall do likewise. This definition forbids the presence of two different playmakers in one team. As you say, the definition has changed and playmakers have evolved, allowing the presence of several creative players in one midfield.

Sneijder is to me the closest thing to what a playmaker is. I cannot see another player stepping on his toes and ruling the central midfield like he does at Inter
 

B20

HEY EVERYONE I IGNORE SOMEONE LOOK AT ME
Joined
Aug 23, 2003
Messages
27,652
Location
Disney Land
Supports
Liverpool
What comes to mind for me when I read the topic header is Deco & Xavi. Both quintessential playmakers who thrive when all the play goes through them, both as happy knitting play together deeper in the pitch and spraying the ball about as they are making defense splitting passes.
 

Cling Bak

Hi, I'm Barry Scott
Joined
Jun 24, 2008
Messages
7,163
Teams are getting away with two play-makers (Fabregas/Nasri, VdV/Modric, Iniesta/Xavi) because of the shift in formations where they're losing a centre-forward. Traditionally, most teams favoured 4-4-2 but with one central forward, you're bolstering your midfield - which you can afford to be a creative player.

On paper, the closest United have is Carrick/Scholes, but Scholes and Carrick often sit very deep and it's usually Fletcher who moves further up to press and win the ball back.

Who are people's all time favourite playmakers? There was a good article in FourFourTwo recently about them. Zidane or Maradona, for me.
 

Nani Nana

Full Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
5,753
Supports
Whoever won the game
Who are people's all time favourite playmakers? There was a good article in FourFourTwo recently about them. Zidane or Maradona, for me.
For me too


Seeing this video, there can obviously be only a single player with such creative freedom in a team, which is why what we deem a playmaker nowadays doesn't quite subscribe to the same mould as in the past. Aside of Sneijder perhaps
 

Striker10

"Ronaldo and trophies > Manchester United football
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
18,857
I don't know if its worth it. If you play two strikers, if you have two offensive wingers and if you encourage your fullbacks to get forward, it's a bit much. You need a good balance and it also depends on your opponants. You wouldn't play two play makers against Barcalona. What would be the point?

You would need the ball first. I think you need the right balance and if you don't have top players then it won't win you anything 9/10. Spurs are great to watch but there is a reason they won't win the league/champions league.

Another point for me is when you play two play makers you only complicate things. Veron for example was top dog in Italy. Looked good with Keane inititally but would you have played him by scholes? Players like Veron/Scholes need the ball all the time. I think egos would play a part somewhat
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2002
Messages
52,886
Location
Founder of IhateMakeleles.org and Gourcufffanboysa
Keano playmaker ?

I'd reckon a Playmaker would be used for players that usually are the center of the team and creates + score goals + win games for the team on a constant basis.

Totti playing in the hole was a playmaker for example.

I won't use a play maker in 4-4-2, the are box to box players. The word playmaker should only be used for players who are good at playing behind the strikers.

Thats just my view on the word "Playmaker".

On another basis, Keano in 4-4-2 was obviously everything, playmaker ? Yes he did make us tick, Defense general ? Yes, he protected the back four extremely well...

So thats why I'd reckon Keano to box to box as they would do every thing on the pitch which is much more than a play maker.

Wouldn't reckon they are the same thing though as for me they are different positions, only slightly but the roles of which they play are totally different + different tactics.
There is this misconception that a playmaker must always create goal or score them. It is not true at all. A play maker controls the ebb and flow of a team's play. He always directs its intensity. He also keeps the team's play flowing constantly, especially in the attacking third making it easier for his team mates to shine. In 2007 for example Scholes did the exact thing Keane did for us for years. Run our team without creating many goals directly. Although with much less energy than Keane could muster in his hey days.
 

Nani Nana

Full Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
5,753
Supports
Whoever won the game
Another point for me is when you play two play makers you only complicate things. Veron for example was top dog in Italy. Looked good with Keane inititally but would you have played him by scholes? Players like Veron/Scholes need the ball all the time. I think egos would play a part somewhat
There is this misconception that a playmaker must always create goal or scor them. It is not true at all. A play maker controls the ebb and flow of a team's play. He always directs its intensity. He also keeps the team's play flowing constantly, especially in the attacking third making it easier for his team mates to shine.
Exactly, which is why I'm intrigued at more and more teams playing 2+ playmakers. They are probably instructed to not play-make, except for Xavi and Sneijder
 

Raees

Pythagoras in Boots
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
29,479
Define 'playmaker' first.
This.

Playmakers have many different interpretations.
Keano playmaker ?

I'd reckon a Playmaker would be used for players that usually are the center of the team and creates + score goals + win games for the team on a constant basis.

Totti playing in the hole was a playmaker for example.

I won't use a play maker in 4-4-2, the are box to box players. The word playmaker should only be used for players who are good at playing behind the strikers.

Thats just my view on the word "Playmaker".

On another basis, Keano in 4-4-2 was obviously everything, playmaker ? Yes he did make us tick, Defense general ? Yes, he protected the back four extremely well...

So thats why I'd reckon Keano to box to box as they would do every thing on the pitch which is much more than a play maker.

Wouldn't reckon they are the same thing though as for me they are different positions, only slightly but the roles of which they play are totally different + different tactics.
https://www.redcafe.net/f7/playmaker-not-position-but-state-mind-article-306221/
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2002
Messages
52,886
Location
Founder of IhateMakeleles.org and Gourcufffanboysa
Exactly, which is why I'm intrigued at more and more teams playing 2+ playmakers. They are probably instructed to not play-make, except for Xavi and Sneijder
True. It also depends on who you have. Barca have been a success with both Iniesta and Xavi playmaking in recent years. I think if one of the playmaker is very discipline with his positioning they can pull it off.

For example if you paired Xavi with Redondo. You'd be able to play them as midfield two and have them both playmaking. Wenger did that for Arsenal with Vieira and Petit.
 

Cling Bak

Hi, I'm Barry Scott
Joined
Jun 24, 2008
Messages
7,163
I don't know if its worth it. If you play two strikers, if you have two offensive wingers and if you encourage your fullbacks to get forward, it's a bit much. You need a good balance and it also depends on your opponants. You wouldn't play two play makers against Barcalona. What would be the point?

You would need the ball first. I think you need the right balance and if you don't have top players then it won't win you anything 9/10. Spurs are great to watch but there is a reason they won't win the league/champions league.

Another point for me is when you play two play makers you only complicate things. Veron for example was top dog in Italy. Looked good with Keane inititally but would you have played him by scholes? Players like Veron/Scholes need the ball all the time. I think egos would play a part somewhat
I agree with your last point, I think. You can have two playmakers, but not in a 4-4-2 when they are both your central midfielders.

Lennon - VdV - Modric - Bale
Defoe - Crouch​

Isn't going to work. But if you remove a CF and include a bit more defensive cover, it most definitely can.

Lennon - Palacios - Modric - Bale
VdV
Defoe​

But it only works if your playmakers compliment each other and one is better operating further forward, the other more from a deep position. On early evidence, VdV and Modric seem to work nicely.

For VdV/Modric, see Iniesta/Xavi and so on.

But Spurs' problem has been squad size/depth with fixture pile-up, not the quality of their best front six, in my opinion.