I only argue with people that are wrong.Do you look at yourself in a mirror at yourself and argue all the time? and do you manage to convince yourself that you are infallible?
I only argue with people that are wrong.Do you look at yourself in a mirror at yourself and argue all the time? and do you manage to convince yourself that you are infallible?
I only argue with people that are wrong.
Seriously, is that the level here?So you must have quite a few arguments with yourself in the mirror as I thought.
Seriously, is that the level here?
I'm used to people dismissing all the evidence and arguing "because I said so" without anything to back them up, but I'm not stooping to that.
Ok, would you rather describe him as a DM that isn't tackling or intercepting but is doing a lot of passing?
I genuinely cannot understand why people in this country can't cope with the concept that the deepest lying midfielder is not necessarily a DM.
What is the role of a modern DM?The role of DM is not defined by the old fashioned stopper any more. Dier most certainly is the epitomy of the modern DM IMO.He is the only "natural" DM we have at the club. All the others are variations on CMs. One of the principal reasons we looked so shaky at the back last year was because we were asking CMs to play an unnatural pivot to incorporate a DM tracking role with which they were not familiar.
Ignoring individual players for a moment. What is the difference between a modern DM and a CM? Would it be possible to pick one from the other by the positions they take up on the pitch? Does one do more of one part of the game than the other?
Ignoring individual players for a moment. What is the difference between a modern DM and a CM? Would it be possible to pick one from the other by the positions they take up on the pitch? Does one do more of one part of the game than the other?
Absolutely. I have no issue with people using the term DM to describe someone who isn't a defensive midfielder (other than its inaccuracy) as long as they're consistent with the use of that term.For me the term "DM" is rather unclear and I don't think people are good enough at clarifying what they mean when they use.
It can be used to describe a position on the field. For example the deepest of 3 central midfielders in a 4-3-3/4-1-2-2-1 type formation. He's the most defensive midfielder, as in the one furthest back. In that position many different players can play very different roles. In a counter attacking "smaller" team it can be a destroyer with very little responsibility on the ball. In a ball playing team is can be one of the best passers in the setting the tempo, playing passes through levels of pressure, always being available to receive the ball etc.
It can also be used to more desrcibe a role. A defensive midfielder is someone whose role is primarily defensive, someone more limited on the ball with clear defensive strengths. That role can be played in multiple positions in various formations. You could have two of these in a very defensive 4-2-3-1 or in a 4-4-2 where you play direct long balls and largely bypass the midfield and leave creativity to the wingers (I'm looking at you Tony Pulis).
Personally I much prefer "deep" midfielder to describe the position on the pitch of a player. As in the two deep midfielders in a 4-2-3-1 or the one deep midfielder in a 4-3-3. It makes it clear that it's not a role, but a position.
Defensive midfielder is a fine description of a role, but gets confusing because the term is used in different ways.
Absolutely. I have no issue with people using the term DM to describe someone who isn't a defensive midfielder (other than its inaccuracy) as long as they're consistent with the use of that term.
What I object to is being told that we need a midfielder dedicated to defending - a DM - in order to improve our team. Then being told when we use a midfielder who is clearly not dedicated to defending that DM now means something else and therefore they were correct.
Absolutely. I have no issue with people using the term DM to describe someone who isn't a defensive midfielder (other than its inaccuracy) as long as they're consistent with the use of that term.
What I object to is being told that we need a midfielder dedicated to defending - a DM - in order to improve our team. Then being told when we use a midfielder who is clearly not dedicated to defending that DM now means something else and therefore they were correct.
But that is just it. We now have a CM dedicated to defending first and foremost ( i.e. a DM, whether you want to call it a Defensive midfielder or Deep lying midfielder) and bingo we look more solid as a defensive unit.
Spot on Finney. If people really can't see the difference between the role that Dier plays as opposed to say a Mason or a Bentaleb or an Alli or a Dembele then that says it all really.
Do you think that you would be able to pick out a Dier heatmap from ones for Bentaleb and Mason if their names were removed?