Xabi Or Masher?...You decide.

[tomasjj]

It worked splendidly for the Chavs with Makelele, so just because Giles says Mascher doesn't do this as well as he prefers doesn't necessarily mean that this system won't work.

And like dww says above:

It is also a mistake in my eyes to view a holding midfield player like Mascher or Hargreaves as the same limited to pure defending beast as say Phil Neville. Players like the former can have a big influence on how you can attack by offering neat short passes to players on the counter and also switching the play intelligently and this combined with the right wide players can indeed result in an overall boost in creativity or attacking play - essentially related to their allowing these players graeter freedom.

By the same token a player like Alonso can be as disruptive to the opposition when defending as a Mascherano-type player.

When I see Mascherano threading incisive passes through to the on-running Babel or Benayoun I might revise my opinion - but I haven't seen this part of his game yet.

17m for a player that is required to pass the ball 10 yards and disrupt the opponents attacks...now that's inflation.

You are twisting the argument.
I incisive passes are your words. Se the part in bold above.

Also, we were not debating the price, which is another issue, but the tactical issues of having a "holding midfielder" a la Makelele.

[Alpha]

it's funny how people are now starting to think more negatively about football. this idea relies on the premise that the player who gets the ball after masher can do something cretive with it whereas a more old-fashioned idea would be that masher should be able to do something creative with it himself after winning it. in fact, i;m becoming slightly tired of this newly created position of a midfielder who "protects" the back 4. it takes away the traditional responsibility of the midfielder. of course the obvios solutin in our case - and it works in theory - is to play xabi and masher in the middle and gerrard on the right wing...

If an extra 'defender' in the midfield gives the forwards, the rest of the midfield and full-backs more licence to attack, what's the problem?

It's different, maybe. Certainly not negative though.

[Frank Leroux]

You are twisting the argument.
I incisive passes are your words. Se the part in bold above.

Also, we were not debating the price, which is another issue, but the tactical issues of having a "holding midfielder" a la Makelele.

Fair enough.

My argument is that a central mid should be able to control the tempo and flow of a game. This requires many if not all elements of the game. When you don't have the ball, get it back. When you do have the ball, use it constructively. To have a player in this most crucial of areas on the pitch who (appears) to be limited in certain of these elements - range of passing, forward movement, desire to box-to-box - hands the centre of the field to the opposition or places even greater emphasis on the attacking players to do what is the hardest task on the pitch - score a goal.

I don't see a dilution of the overall team performance by going the Scholes/Keane, Vieira/Petit, Lampard/Essien route rather than the Gerrard/Hamann or Lampard/Makelele one. I can only see benefits.

[GordonGecko]

This poll seems to have sparked a fair bit of debate....obviously an issue close to people's hearts.

It would be a sad state of affairs IF we had to sell one to keep the other.

[Jesus]

Mascherano/Lucas/Gerrard midfield 3 has real potential and everything we need.

I'd cash in on Xabi while his stock is still high.

[badpiggy]

It worked splendidly for the Chavs with Makelele, so just because Giles says Mascher doesn't do this as well as he prefers doesn't necessarily mean that this system won't work.

And like dww says above:

It is also a mistake in my eyes to view a holding midfield player like Mascher or Hargreaves as the same limited to pure defending beast as say Phil Neville. Players like the former can have a big influence on how you can attack by offering neat short passes to players on the counter and also switching the play intelligently and this combined with the right wide players can indeed result in an overall boost in creativity or attacking play - essentially related to their allowing these players graeter freedom.

the most defensive minded team to have won the league in years.

this whole argument is bizarre really. so many of us on here claim to know what rafa is up to and there are endless posts about formations and systems but i've yet to see one complete technical assessment of rafa's systematic approach. lots of flag waving defending constantly giving away possession as a good tactic and defending two players for one position - one midfielder to win the ball and another to do something with it...

well i'm with gilesy on this one - there's only one "system" - good players playing in their proper positions who can play good football and create and/or find space.

and the idea that a midfielder with no attacking responsibilities can contribute to forward creativity - come on. has momo scored for us or provided "assists"? has masher? soon people will be arguing that what's needed is an increase to 12 player teams to accomodate the defensive midfielder.

[Alpha]

Right I know we have had this discussion on the Mascher-Alonso thread but I have realised that the position I took is actually dependent on the other players we have in the line up.

I really do believe that currently we are currently less creative with Gerrard and Mascher together in the middle. I believe that without wide players who can offer options deep and then get forward for a quick counter Gerrard ends up coming deep to collect the ball from Mascher too much - this means that we end up playing too many long balls and that chances of attacks are waisted.

As Xabi is our most productive playmaker, it stands to reason that we lose something creatively without him.

But your point about the limited options from our wide players is just as much as a issue with Alonso on the pitch as with Mascherano. Xabi's diagonal balls are less effective without players who can take full advantage of the territory his quality gains us.

In addition, Alonso cannot operate without time on the ball. He needs a partner in midfield to buy him time and space. As it happens, Masher is perfect for this role so that could be the eventual solution but we lose, in my opinion, more from Gerrard if he is the one to play this auxillary role than we lose from him if he drops deep to dictate the play, which, I would argue, is his natural game anyway and the reason why he dovetails better with El Jefe than with Xabi.

[Alpha]

the most defensive minded team to have won the league in years.

And you believe it was the system that made them defensive?

That Chelsea side was capable of tearing teams apart at will but they played for a manager who would drill them to protect a 1-0 lead rather than push for a second or third or fourth.

Defensive midfielders don't make for a defensive team. They allow tradionally defensive players in other positions to attack.

The most extreme example is in Brazil, traditionally the most decorated attacking football nation of all. Nowadays, many of their teams play with not just one but two defensive midfielders so their fullbacks can play as wingers.

That doesn't make for a defensive brand of football, does it?

[Howard_lfc]

As Xabi is our most productive playmaker, it stands to reason that we lose something creatively without him.
But your point about the limited options from our wide players is just as much as a issue with Alonso on the pitch as with Mascherano. Xabi's diagonal balls are less effective without players who can take full advantage of the territory his quality gains us.

In addition, Alonso cannot operate without time on the ball. He needs a partner in midfield to buy him time and space. As it happens, Masher is perfect for this role so that could be the eventual solution but we lose, in my opinion, more from Gerrard if he is the one to play this auxillary role than we lose from him if he drops deep to dictate the play, which, I would argue, is his natural game anyway and the reason why he dovetails better with El Jefe than with Xabi.

Good post but I disagree with points in it mate:

1. I don't grasp that Alpha. How can our most productive playmaker make us lose something on the creative side when it's he who is pulling the strings? Surely a playmaker offers more creatively than a holding player - given that they both allow the other cm to get forward effectively.

2. I would argue that Xabi is the one player in our squad who's control, turns and feints, buy him more time on the ball than any other.

3. Gerrards natural game IMO is that of a marauding cm. That's when he's at his best and almost unstoppable. World class even. He's far less effective lying deep. And I disagree with his dovetailing with JM. I know Rafa's on your side with this at the moment but we all know he's not infallible.


Cheers.

[tomasjj]

Good debate here.

I agree with your points Howard, and it got me thinking...here is a synthesis of all 3 points in a way...if you can follow my ramblings

And I also think Xabi is better at playing in Gerrard when he is on his runs forward than what Masch currently is.
And this is what is lacking when SG drops deep, him receiving the ball when he on the run forward facing the opposing goal, not when he has his back against that goal. He needs to receive the ball when he is in his stride forward. This he can best do when not dropping deep. Also it seems to me that SG stays further up and lets Alonso dictate play in a larger extent than Mascher, hence SG being more often in those advanced and advantageous positions for this kind of player.

[CAD]

Mascher offers us more when we're off the ball.

Alonso offers us more when we're in possession.

That said I think that Mascher offers more than Alonso when we combine the two.

We have been trying to shoehorn Alonso into a HM since day one. It will be the best thing that ever happend to him if he was allowed to leave and play football for a club who didn't play with a HM.

[hamshanks]

Alonso is the best midfield player we have, and yes, I think he's better than Gerrard. Mascherano is a good player and it's not a like for like comparison, but he's not in the least bit creative and we desperately need creativity in midfield. I think £17 million is a massive amount of money for another defensive midfield player.

[Alpha]

Good post but I disagree with points in it mate:

1. I don't grasp that Alpha. How can our most productive playmaker make us lose something on the creative side when it's he who is pulling the strings? Surely a playmaker offers more creatively than a holding player - given that they both allow the other cm to get forward effectively.
Read it again mate. I said that we lose something creative when he is not there.

2. I would argue that Xabi is the one player in our squad who's control, turns and feints, buy him more time on the ball than any other.
Xabi is a known quantity now. Any opposing manager with sense knows to close him down quickly because if he is allowed time to put his foot on the ball, he'll split them in half again and again. He does well to buy himself time but without assistance, his passing game is obviously going to be restricted.

3. Gerrards natural game IMO is that of a marauding cm. That's when he's at his best and almost unstoppable. World class even. He's far less effective lying deep. And I disagree with his dovetailing with JM. I know Rafa's on your side with this at the moment but we all know he's not infallible.
I agree he is a marauding cm and that is exactly why I prefer him alongside Mascherano. He hardly lies deep - if he drops deep to begin a move, he can usually be found later in the phase trying to finish it off. If he plays higher up the pitch in-between the lines, he is easier to pick up and he has less 'space' to maraud into.

To be honest, I think Alonso treads on Gerrard's toes. Before Xabi arrived, he was the playmaker. Of course Xabi is better at dictating the play so if Gerrard has to dance to Alonso's tune, even if it means doing the 'graveyard shift' on the right side of midfielder, so be it. But Mascherano's destructive game allows Gerrard to be the primary creative force once again and that's why their respective styles and skillsets are complementary. Whether or not that is better for the team is another argument.

Cheers.

[tomasjj]

Honestly, I have my doubts about SG being a smart enough footballer to be the main creative force of a team.

[Kilteragh]

Honestly, I have my doubts about SG being a smart enough footballer to be the main creative force of a team.

He never knows when to play the simple ball. He tries the killer pass nine times out of ten. Great when it comes off but when it doesn't we lose possession. Still think he's great though but the killer pass thing drives me nuts.