[Discussion] Recreating the Busquets Role

[poobington]

Thanks, I kept racking my brain, and it is in no way definitive but it's I think a reasonably well thought out opinion, and yes, if you significantly lowered his 'creative freedom' in combination with dropping all the various sliders to 'rarely', and playing a low risk mentality i.e. 'defensive' or 'counter' he would then be set up to only play simple risk adverse passes.

In fact this is exactly what the 'Anchor man' role in FM is set up for on low risk mentality's ('defensive' or 'counter') it has those exact settings. If you get a chance have a glance at the various settings of roles, it should hopefully give you a feel of how the various roles differ in the way they are set up to operate.

I don't know if you read the article on the defensive enganche but currently that's how I have my DMC set up and he seems pretty good effective

[ModernLefty]

It probably is, that is because the basic principle behind the defensive enganche it is essentially placing a deep lying player (d)/ anchor man (defends whether you want through balls or not) in the AM role, excepted with more closing down, so that you utilise them as almost an attacking bounce board.

The best real life example of this was Moyes use of Fellani at Everton last year, they used him as a target man in the attacking midfielder slot, and aimed the ball at that huge chest of his, which with his amazing chest control meant that he either brought the ball under control, or played one touch chest passes to people in the vicinity.

Apologies for the dodgy music, but this gives some idea: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43QjOV2G7-c

2:53 is a prime example.

[yonko]

Clearly you do not watch enough barca, man. You're so ignorant and clueless.

You think that's appropriate and good for discussion? Especially when such ad hominem is just used to dodge arguments. Why don't you start with going back and responding to the points made? I'm getting kind of tired trying to figure out new views to reach out. Do I need to repost my whole message in order to avoid a meta-discussion of what's said? Are you really unable to read back?

Let's forget the fluidity issue? It's non-pertinent. Can't you agree that if you had to choose, you wouldn't choose Busquets first.

Busquets doesn't see significantly more of the ball than any of the players nearest to Xavi. Compare his figures to unarguable non-playmakers Alves or Piqué and you won't see a big difference there. He makes a lot of simple passes and creates roughly the least chances in the Barcelona starting line-up by any meter. To get the point across, he doesn't create. There is nothing to suggest he is more important to the attack than about any other player in the team. All this I deducted by watching dozens of games and then having statistics that congrue. What kind of backing do you have for your claims?

Also, attributes do not dictate role selection. Busquets has ability no doubt but you can't have 11 stars thinking like they're the stars on the pitch. And make no mistake, Busquets is not the go-to guy whatever might the hipsters say.

"He is key" is the only argument seen for DLP in this topic really. It doesn't get any more ambiguous and nonsensical than that. Ironic that tomtuck despises "makes things happen" kind of talk and then the argument for Busquets role is just similar blabber without depth. It really boils down to a couple of you guys calling every deep-lying midfielder with the least of technical ability a playmaker just to spite "the ignorant".

Where did I call you "ignorant" and/or "clueless"?! I simply concluded that you don't watch enough Barca games based on your opinion that Busquets doesn't create anything. That's not a personal attack, much less childish. Now I will say that if you really watch Barca games as you say, then perhaps you don't understand and can't analyze well whatever is that you are seeing. I say that because Busquets does create.

He is not just a regular DMC which in FM is represented with DM-d role. He has more creative role than that but that doesn't mean that he is as creative as Xavi or Iniesta for example. And I'm not saying that. However he does have some playmaking role on the team. Yes, a lot of what Busquets does is simple, but that doesn't mean that he is creating nothing. What he does in his role is part of what players like Xabi Alonso and Schweinsteiger do for their teams (and these players are playmakers for their respective teams, right?). And if teams like Real Madrid and Bayern (pre-Pep) have only one player in their midfield, Barca has three of those players share the role/ responsability and help each other with the playmaking duties.

Busquets may not have assists and key passes on regular basis, but doesn't mean he is not creating or that he doesn't have playmaking role. It just means that he operates and plays his role deeper. Which occasionally only allows him to have an assist and key passes. Sometimes he has "hockey assists" too.

Bottom line, all I'm saying is that he is a little more creative and does a little more playmaking than a regular DMC, which to me in FM terms is the DLP-d role.

[Fond Foat]

I agree with yonko on this one.

If a designated playmaker doesn't see much of the ball, it doesn't mask the fact that he is still a designated playmaker.

Similarly, if someone not considered a playmaker instead sees more of the ball as a result of Xavi being marked, plays a blinder and spreads play, creates assists and makes 100 passes, they still aren't the playmaker.

My question here is should a playmaker be considered as a role. I do not disagree with the idea of a designated playmaker, but that does not convince me that the player is therefore a playmaker regardless of performance in the actual match. I feel the concept of playmaker is dominated by performance rather than expectation.

[yonko]

We will just have to disagree on this matter then. I feel that even if a player is not a designated playmaker, he may well have such an influence on the game that he ended up being the playmaker for the team on that day. In the same way the usual playmaker is marked out of the game, can't find space, and has no impact on the match, well then he was not the playmaker that day. I am not sure that this this logic can be considered flat out wrong?

You would therefore state (if I understand your comment correctly) that a player who is called the playmaker but does not influence a match for a season would still be the playmaker of that team because the stats do not matter. I struggle to follow that logic. Interesting discussion, however.

But IMO Busquets, Xavi, Iniesta and Messi always have such influence on the game and the way Barca plays its Tiki-Taka, even if it doesn't show up on the stat sheet. They are always given playmaking roles/duties. How well they execute them is a different matter.

[Fond Foat]

But IMO Busquets, Xavi, Iniesta and Messi always have such influence on the game and the way Barca plays its Tiki-Taka, even if it doesn't show up on the stat sheet. They are always given playmaking roles/duties. How well they execute them is a different matter.

If they always have such an influence I would have no problem agreeing with you. I just question the always.

[SnUrF]

I'd go for DM-d simply because I don't think Busquets would have TTB set to often as DLP-d has. Pirlo = DLP-d, Busquets = DM-d. Imo.

-SnUrF

[jujigatame]

Does Pirlo really take on that many defensive duties? I'd say he plays more like a DLP/S than a DLP/D.

[tomtuck01]

I'd go for DM-d simply because I don't think Busquets would have TTB set to often as DLP-d has. Pirlo = DLP-d, Busquets = DM-d. Imo.

-SnUrF

It could of course be argued that he plays plenty of through balls to Iniesta and Xavi. Although I appreciate in FM terms a "Through Ball" is probably classed as a pass slid through to a striker/wide attacking midifielder running through on goal.

[SnUrF]

Does Pirlo really take on that many defensive duties? I'd say he plays more like a DLP/S than a DLP/D.

Perhaps, but my point was about the TTBs.

-SnUrF

[kazm]

Yep and Song plays a lot of throughballs back to his defense.

[tomtuck01]

Yep and Song plays a lot of throughballs back to his defense.

Well no, because a through ball isn't a pass backwards or sideways, which is what Song primarily does at Barcelona. Such a waste really.

[kazm]

A waste indeed. But then again, Barca has bored me the last 2 seasons. Sure Messi's brilliance is awesome but their tiki taka has become way to uneventful and patient. Hoping Neymar gives them some Brazilian flair like they had with Ronaldinho.