The Two Most Common Midfield Setups

They say that the game is won or lost in the midfield, which is due to the area's importance in the tempo of the game, and is why you see so many teams switching to formations with more than 3 midfielders to ensure that they don't lose the all important battle in the centre of the park.

It isn't just a numerical advantage which allows you to dominate the innermost area of the pitch, organisation, ability, and the general set up of the midfielders are also factors which effect the outcome of the aforementioned battle, the latter is what I will be talking about throughout this article.

There are two systems in midfield which are predominant over the others, the double-pivot, and the destroyer, passer, and creator trio.

The setup of a double pivot has become increasingly popular in recent years, especially after it was used by many teams in the European championships, Germany, Netherlands, and Spain (at times) to name a few. Usually seen in a 4-2-3-1 system, the double pivot is the partnership between the '2' of this formation, where the midfielders take turns in advancing forward to attack, whilst the teammate sits back and covers the defence for a potential opposition counter-attack.

The double pivot is a very versatile midfield set-up and can be seen in many different systems, primarily because it is a balanced partnership in terms of the attacking and defensive responsibility of the two players that can be favoured towards one side if necessary, for example if you want to play with more caution to your game, you can simply restrict the freedom that the more attacking midfielder has, and keep his defensive partner as usual.

One downfall of the pivot however is that it can result in the deeper midfielder getting isolated if his teammate ventures too far up field, making the side vulnerable to a counter-attack however the positives definitely outweigh the negatives which is why it is such a common sight.

Another common system seen in the centre of the pitch is the destroyer, passer, and the creator trio similar to Mikel, Ramires, and Oscar at Chelsea, and Kehl, Gundogan and Gotze for Borussia Dortmund. Like the double-pivot, this system is also very balanced, as the focus on both attacking and defending is shared not equally, but to an equal amount between the three.

He made the destroyer role his own

The destroyer is the designated ball-winner who breaks up the play, like Makélélé, after he wins the ball, a simple pass is played to either the creator or passer. The latter of the two is normally a box-to-box midfielder, who is a well-rounded player, Michael Carrick played this role in previous seasons for United, alongside Scholes (creator) and Fletcher (destroyer). The creator, is the playmaker of the side, and is usually the highest in the staggered midfield, orchestrating the play from between the banks of opposition, however this is not always the case, take Scholes for example.

There isn't a big disadvantage to this combination unlike the double pivot, but is also versatile in that it can be played under most styles. Another similarity is that they both make the midfield staggered, in the double-pivot, one midfielder is slightly higher than the other, but behind the attacking midfielder (in a 4-2-3-1) and the players in the other trio are all in different positions in terms of level up field. This makes it so an opposition midfielder has to face 3 challenges as upon beating the first man, he will be faced with the second, and then the third should he beat him whereas if they are in a straight bank, if one is beaten then the opposition player is free to run at the defence with the whole of the midfield trailing.

This is one of the reasons why these are very common setups in midfield, having players in staggered positions was used to great success by Mourinho, at Chelsea with which he played a 4-3-3 system with Lampard, Essien and Makélélé fitting in to a shape similar to the destroyer, passer, creator pattern however with Lampard in more of an attacking, goalscoring midfielder role where he did so well in.

United's system in midfield differed from Chelsea's as their creator in Scholes played deeper than Lampard did for Chelsea, also Makélélé sat nearer to his own defence than Fletcher. The London side had two box-to-box midfielders in Essien and Lampard, with the latter more aggressive, whereas United didn't have one, so they relied a lot more on wing play to support the striker whereas Chelsea had support from the centre and the flanks, which made them much more threatening than Ferguson's team, giving them the upper hand as they dominated them in the league, which just shows how important having the right midfield setup is.

Thanks for reading! I didn't really enjoy this article myself so any feedback in the comments below will be appreciated as usual. Follow me on Twitter here!