Targetman | Hold-Up Play

RDCR07

Not a bad guy (Whale Killer)
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
33,477
Location
Transfer Forum
Everyone is so adamant these days on hold on play. But how important is it really? Do we need our new striker to do this every game? If we are dominant against lesser opponents, then in my opinion this holding up play wont come into play as much as when we are playing away from home against a strong opposition, when we can holding a slender goal lead or when we have to counter attack.

Is being a targetman absolutely essential for a striker these days? I understand Zlatan was great at it but didnt you think sometimes it played against us by slowing up the play since he isnt the quickest? And at other times it was great because him holding up the play meant the others could run up the field in support. So whats the cafe's opinion on being a targetman? Is it essential we look for a striker with this trait?

https://www.fourfourtwo.com/us/performance/skills/zlatan-ibrahimovic-how-play-targetman

Zlatan Ibrahimovic: How to play as a targetman
The towering Swedish striker explains the key elements of being a frontman, from holding up the ball to getting on the end of corners

Holding up the ball
“The key is not to lose the ball when you get it. If I’m alone, I try to protect the ball and keep defenders away using my back, arms, strength and balance. That’s important because if I can hold the ball, it gives the team a chance to join me in attack. I’ll hold it until the rest of the other players come into play. As soon as there’s a player in a better position, I’ll give him the ball. Or, I can go for goal myself. That’s sometimes my instinct. I’m an intelligent player and will make the right choice at that moment.”

Positioning yourself
“I try to position myself where I can get the ball. Sometimes I drop back to pick it up; other times I find space to help the team and draw a defender from his position. Then I might try to open space so that the midfielders have another option: me. I’m not the type of player to make runs away from play, but sometimes you have to do this to sacrifice yourself for the team, even though you know you will not get the ball. It opens space for others. In a good partnership, the other striker would do the same next time.”

Meeting crosses
“The key is to make your move before the defender: that way you create space for yourself. I’m not the best at that – David Trezeguet is. I’ve never seen somebody more intelligent than him in the box at corners or set-pieces. It’s like he knows exactly where the ball will be, in the air or on the floor. Me? I don’t have that instinct. Sometimes I am on the first post at corners, sometimes I’m on the second. I do it because I have to.”

Anticipating play
“I try to anticipate what is going to happen before I get the ball; where my opponents and team-mates are and where they will be in a few seconds. I look and sense and know what certain players are likely to do. But it’s also impossible to get it right every time. Those who get it right the most are the better players. That’s the difference between a top-class player and a simple one – the best players think alike.”

Battling centre-backs
“Many defenders will tug or push you. You have to be prepared for everything and not underestimate them. They will do this because they are weak and you are strong. A fantastic defender will not resort to this, but will play the game fairly. Paolo Maldini and Alessandro Nesta were tough opponents, but I really respected them.”

Coping with abuse
“Some defenders try to put you off, physically and verbally. Some have said things about my family – they call me a gypsy. My mother is from Croatia; my father, Bosnia. I was born in Sweden and felt 100 per cent Swedish, but that did not matter to them. I don’t get so upset now. The key is to focus on what you have to do in the game, not on what’s being said. One other thing to remember is that you have a responsibility to the team not to react. If you think that it’s part of your job to stay calm, that can help.”
 
Targetman is a type of different types of strikers. They're not essential for the team to be successful but it depends on what the manager's want and which type of strikers he prefers to play with. Some managers want to play with a target upfront to control the ball and hold it to help the others around, others want the striker to keep drifting wide to create space, others want strikers that always looks to run behind defenses and utilize spaces in counters and others just want a typical number 9 who keeps positioned in the box. They're valuable and in the right system will succeed.

The key is what the manager want his striker to do and which type he prefers. Jose for example prefers a targetman upfront while Pep not so much, rather a striker who moves a lot and stretch defense, and so on.
 
The use of targetman has become rather primitive these days. Simply because you are making your attack transition very obvious and relying on one single player to make the system work.

Besides, it's a very specialised role and very rare to find an effective targetman for the required level in United. What if he has a bad day? You would need a targetman substitute for those days but as I said, it's very difficult to hold the ball and create chances against the current quality of European defenders. It's to a much higher standard than it used to be. More so the tactical systems employed by defensive teams that give very little space.

Any system that is so fragile and dependent on one single element, will never be the best for a UCL winner. You would want more variety so that opposing teams wouldnt focus on neutralising your single joint of attack.
 
Not a fan of them personally but it's easy to see why some managers like them. Especially ones who prefer a dull play style.
 
I don't get the targetman neutralization thing?

They usually play with a 10 just behind, if you focus on them, that is, if you are even capable of doing it, the secondary striker swoops into the space...
 
not a fan of them personally. We've been notoriously poor with them for nigh on a decade now. from Carroll to Benteke none have succeeded, just because we don't have a system and players that are geared towards getting the best out of them. It sounds pretty simple but you've really got to buy players who fit your specific style of play. Many a talented manager try to mix it up with disastrous results.
 
I think they are essential in a counter-attacking system. A team playing possession football doesn't have to rely on transitions as much - especially at the top - since in possession, teams like to build from the back (or from midfield). In a counter-attacking system - with a physical tall forward - the team can afford to hoof the ball to him until the other goal threats from MF join him. Or he can move into the wings freeing up the middle dragging defenders out of their positions. Or just go for the goal himself. It basically adds a new dimension to your attack (though if you have really pacy forwards, this can be circumvented ala Ronaldo-Rooney). A bad day for a targetman ain't that bad for the team if his link-up is good enough - he'll still create a few chances.
 
Obviously a fake Zlatan interview, since when does he think anyone is better than him?
 
Hold up play is only useful when you have a winger who runs in behind and scores like Ronaldo or Bale. When you have the likes of Lingard and Martial on the flanks, it's basically fecking useless.

Chicharito was exactly the kind of striker we needed in my opinion. I am positive if we played him up top regularly, we would have been more successful than we were when we played Rooney in the last few years. He scored goals.
 
There are different ways to win football matches and it depends on your style of football. Liverpool we're great in attack without strikers who held the ball up well.

But for Chelsea winning the league Costa's first half of the season was absolutely vital and he played like a proper target man. I don't think they would have raced ahead in the league with Strurridge up top.
 
Hold up play is only useful when you have a winger who runs in behind and scores like Ronaldo or Bale. When you have the likes of Lingard and Martial on the flanks, it's basically fecking useless.

Chicharito was exactly the kind of striker we needed in my opinion. I am positive if we played him up top regularly, we would have been more successful than we were when we played Rooney in the last few years. He scored goals.
No chance. We struggled at times to effectively transition from midfield to attack, having a player who can't protect the ball for shit would've only made that much worse. When Zlatan got injured this became abundantly clear.
 
Hold up play is only useful when you have a winger who runs in behind and scores like Ronaldo or Bale. When you have the likes of Lingard and Martial on the flanks, it's basically fecking useless.

Chicharito was exactly the kind of striker we needed in my opinion. I am positive if we played him up top regularly, we would have been more successful than we were when we played Rooney in the last few years. He scored goals.
I think you mistook something with targetman. Ronaldo & Bale type of wing forward (Reus, Messi...) prefers a mobile "decoy" forward who can operate in different area of the final third. That's not really a classic targetman, but modern (central) forward people call. Morata have the attribute to be either, but his thinking is to be the main man & stay the focal of the attacking than being a decoy. That's the difference between him & Benzema.

Targetman prefers normal wingers who main job is keeping width & stretch play. Mourinho's no 9 profile is on the border of a classic targetman & modern (central forward). He want a focal point for the attack. However, since his focus is on transitioning, it's difficult for a classic targetman to be in the scoring position inside the box, when the hold up play started nearer to the halfway line. So in Mourinho system, there happens to be a wing forward who like to drift inside take the position whenever the main forward couldn't get there on time, but also a dedicated wide forward as explained above to work with the target man. Normally other coaches would look at a balanced system with 2 normal wingers, or position exchanging front line with 2 wide attackers who like to drift inside & a modern (central) forward who can drift wide.
 
Last edited:
Now he was a very particular type of target man but Berbatov was actually a key player to break down deep defences. His ability at shielding the ball and his short passing was really important to achieve this
 
Zlatan is a weird one - he's probably the most technically proficient target men there's been for a long time. It's almost like he's a #10 in a #9's body. Berbatov made me feel the same way when he joined.
 
There are many reasons why we couldn't score a lot of goals and convert our chances into goals. I don't deny that's due to our poor finishing, but I also believe that is also due to Mourinho's style which is using Zlatan as his target man to score goals didn't make the best out of the others. Look at Klopp, none of his players are in top 10 list PL top scorer but Liverpool was able to score a lot of goals due to their style of play.

There is no problem of playing target man IMO but I just feel that it doesn't suit to the current attackers that we have such as Martial and Rashford.
 
Forwards don't particularly need any one trait or style of play. A hold up player, someone who plays on the shoulder, a poacher - I hear plenty of claims about what's important in the modern game and about certain types of players becoming outdated when it isn't true. There will always be a place for any style of striker if he is of a good enough calibre.

Its all about balance - if you have a striker who looks to play with his back to goal and receive the ball to feet, complimenting him with penetrative runners would get the best out of them all and create a strong team. If you have a static no.10 and a wide man who also comes towards the ball then a striker who plays on the shoulder and stretches the play could be a better option.

Every game is not going to go perfectly for every team or every player. There will always be games, or moments in games, where a forward will struggle, his particular style of play doesn't work and you wish your team had an attacker with a different skill set. You always want what you don't have. When he does perform, you appreciate what he brings to the side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kag
Zlatan is a weird one - he's probably the most technically proficient target men there's been for a long time. It's almost like he's a #10 in a #9's body. Berbatov made me feel the same way when he joined.

In the alternative universe where Zlatan doesn´t get hurt and Griezmann joins I think they´d have been a hell of a front pairing, like Berbatov-Keane but even more quality.
 
Hold up play is important. Strikers don't necessarily need to be like Ibrahimovic, but they need to be able to link up well with the other attackers and keep the ball under pressure.

Benzema and Lewandowski are great examples. I wouldn't say they're all about brute force, or that they're huge units who terrify defenders. But they hold the ball up very successfully, often through intelligence as opposed to athleticism.
 
Hold up play is important. Strikers don't necessarily need to be like Ibrahimovic, but they need to be able to link up well with the other attackers and keep the ball under pressure.

Benzema and Lewandowski are great examples. I wouldn't say they're all about brute force, or that they're huge units who terrify defenders. But they hold the ball up very successfully, often through intelligence as opposed to athleticism.
I think you have to be technically proficient to be a target man for a top team. Strikers like Benteke/Carroll won't succeed at A top side because of this. The likes of Costa/Giroud have decent to good technique amongst other things. who's the last real big man crosses thriving target man who succeeded at a top club without good technique?
 
I think you have to be technically proficient to be a target man for a top team. Strikers like Benteke/Carroll won't succeed at A top side because of this. The likes of Costa/Giroud have decent to good technique amongst other things. who's the last real big man crosses thriving target man who succeeded at a top club without good technique?

Exactly, being a target man doesn't mean you're Emilie Healey in terms of technique. RVN, Vieri and Drogba all had great technique. Lewandowski is great modern example
 
Having one is useful to have, give us that extra option in attacks.

Better to have more options than a few, making us more unpredictable and good back-up strategy in attacks.

Especially when our attacks with pace is not working, like when opponents park the bus.
 
If your general play is really good, and I'm talking that Bayern, Barca and Madrid level then you don't need one. That's where i think teams' focus should be, improving the football they play.
 
Is Morata really that much of a better targetman than either Auba or Lacazette?
Better than the former, but not the later if we're talking non aerial balls. Lacazette is pretty good with his back to goal while Auba is pretty much useless. Morata has the added height advantage but isnt quite as strong as the frenchman.
 
Kevin Davies in Bolton was a textbook target man in my opinion.
Not a star quality overall, but it seemed he always did the job for Bolton and play the exact role which a target man should play.