Help mih people. Is Clyde Leon a ball winner, a playmaker, a defensive or attacking midfielder. From the bits I've seen of him ah cyah make out what he does to deserve being in de midfield and to keep being picked.
This is what people get confused about. This single specific role people like to assign to players is the down fall of our football. A player has to be all of the above, not just one. If Clyde Leon is on the field he should be a playmaker/ball winner/defensive player/attacking player. If a player is starting that should mean that his overall ability and desire to perform these roles consistently and competently is greater than a player who is not starting. A player may get specific instuctions or assignments but the overall role always includes both ball wining and attacking /playmaking. I am tired of playing on teams where guys dont defend because they consider themselves as "an attackin midfielder". or the reverse case where guys dont move forward and attack because they are "defensive midfielders". If people want to win, then the whole team has to make up their minds to attack and defend as a team. Everybody has to transition from defense to attack and also from attack to defense. The single role crap cyah work at all.
True, there is a distribution of capabilities/roles expected from ALL players, but within this distriubution, it leans quite heavily to one of these capabilities/roles specific to position. Attacking midfielders do have to defend, but the lion share of creativity within the midfield falls on their shoulders, likewise wing backs attack and play roles in this regard (a la Roberto Carlos and others), but closing down wing plays and being part of that defensive set up is their main role. General concept applies to any position on the field, of course with some variations w/formation....
"Attacking midfielder" and "defensive midfielder" are just labels to me. It's a viewers label based on a players percieved strength. Its not an actual complete role. The lion share of creativity does not have to fall on a specific midfielder's shoulders if the capabilities of the entire midfield is balanced. Its the same case for wining the ball. Why shouldn't we encorage players to be just as good in both attack and defense? We should strive for excelence. I have found that the of causes an unnecessary imbalance, which makes both attacking and defending a more difficult task.
Not sure I agree w/this as I see it as a coaches label, yes, we are all viewers on this forum (though some of course are coaches so no disrespect), but it's ok, we can agree to disagree, in a nutshell, I am saying there is a distribution and
all have to contribute in all areas, but from an analytical viewpt. most players will be capable of contributing more in one area than another b/c of their honed (coached) and natural abilities -- the ideal is that we can all contribute equally in all of these areas, but pragmatically speaking, this does happen, so players are played in positions to their strengths (all things being equal: no injuries, opponent scouting etc). These types of players that you describe are utility players and of course exist, but not every player is capable of performing at the highest level in every position on the field and in every aspect of the game. I'll stick to TT for examples: Marvin Andrews has scored goals for TT, mainly w/his head, that does not mean his strengths are in the attacking 3rd as we all know, defending is his strength, hence he's one of our best sweepers in our lifetime. Dwight in the twilight of his career has adjusted to be an individual w/strengths in the defensive 3rd still w/some skills in the attacking 3rd and scoring arenas, but his undeniable strength at the peak of his career was as a pointer.
Striving for excellence and contributing on any part of the pitch is a given (IMHO), at various positions on the pitch however, you are required to contribute more in one area than in another -- that's my only pt. Not disagreeing that players need to be well rounded and capable of contributing in any aspect of the game (ball winning, hustling, attacking, etc) which in fact they ought to do
