The decline of the Box to Box Midfielder

Football, down the years, has been a game of constant change and evolution. In 1872, England played her first competitive match against Scotland . The English team was setup in the 1-2-7 or the 1-1-8-8. For England, one player would remain in defence, picking up loose balls, and a couple of players would station themselves around the center circle, and hoof the ball upfield for the other players to chase.

The English style of play at the time was individual oriented- players were renowned for their dribbling and flair on the ball.

In the present generation, England’s blueprint lies in the big- bulky Center Forward – Carroll and Crouch. Hoofing up the ball forward, in more of hope rather than expectation of the center forward muscling his opposite number in the air, to knock the ball down for an on-rushing player to put his laces through the ball and score a goal. Though there has been an attempt to move away from this system.

One of the many casualties of this evolution, which has taken the game to new levels, is the gradual erosion of the once – engine room of the team – The Box to Box Midfielder. The once heart-beat of a football team’s midfield is rarely heard these days. A combination of various changes in the game have outcast the Box to Box Midfielder.

Players like him are in decline.

The eventual decline of the Box to Box Midfielder can be put down to a various number of reasons. Down the years, England’s teams would line-up in the 4-4-2, with the two Box to Box Midfielders forming the Engine room of the team. As English football plays catch-up with continent on the tactical front, the role of the Box to Box Midfielder finds itself on the fringes of this change, for the simple reason that the 4-4-2 is no more the numero uno. With the plethora of success that the 4-2-3-1 has brought to teams that have used the formation, the 4-4-2 stands on slippery ground. So much so, that one of the most ardent followers of the 4-4-2, Sir Alex Ferguson, has shifted focus to 4-2-3-1, this season.

On the left – the 4-2-3-1; On the right – 4-4-2

There is a stark contrast between the 4-2-3-1( on the left) and the 4-4-2(on the right.) The central midfield in a 4-2-3-1 consists of the Ball Winner and the Deep Lying Playmaker or the quarter-back. The ball winner is the work-horse of the midfield – running, tackling and intercepting. The Deep Lying Playmaker provides the vision and the craft from deep. The midfield in a 4-4-2 comprises of two workaholics, who cover every inch of grass on the field – making lung busting runs into the 6 yard box, when needed, whereas tracking back and helping the back 4 when defending.

Another point to be noted in this context, is the emergence of specialists in central midfield. With the gradual rise of the 4-2-3-1, teams have shifted emphasis to a triangle in midfield – 1 Ball Winner, 1 Deep Lying Playmaker and 1 Attacking Midfielder. Below, I have listed Some prominent examples of such triangles :

1) Busquets – Xavi – Iniesta :

Ball Winner – BusquetsDeep Lying Playmaker – XaviAttacking Midfielder – Iniesta

2) Khedira – Alonso – Ozil :

Ball Winner – KhediraQuarter Back – AlonsoAttacking Midfielder – Ozil

3) Vidal – Pirlo – Marchisio

Ball Winner – VidalDeep Playmaker – PirloAttacking Midfielder – Marchisio

Number 17 – Song; Number 8 – Arteta; Number 16 – Ramsey

Another good example of a midfield trio with ‘well-defined roles’ would be the Arsenal Midfield of the 2011-12 season. In the above picture( taken in the game against Newcastle) we see that when Arsenal have the ball, Arteta pushes forward alongside Ramsey to support the attack, thus converting the 4-2-3-1( on the left) to a Christmas tree formation(4-3-3) on the right, with Song playing the role of a ball winner.

A quick scan through the engine rooms of the top teams in the world would yield a few handpicked names, who are conventional Box to Box midfielders. Going by current trends in the football and the emergence of micro tactics, the 11 players in a team have their roles well defined to them. Thus, in such an era, where tactics reach the very roots of a team, the dynamism of Box to box Midfielders would not find a place in the starting XI’s of many a manager.

Another point, that springs out from the emergence of micro tactics, is the scouting and training of talent. Teams across the continent would hardly scout for the next Roy Keane, or the next Patrick Vieria. The footballing world, isn’t churning talents who are capable of holding ground in a 2man midfield – you either get a Ganso, or you get a Casemiro( a budding defensive midfielder, from Sao Paulo.)

Frank Lampard explained his take on the decline of Box to Box Midfielders in an interview at Chelsea

“Football has become a bit more tactical and organised, it is about becoming harder to beat … If the manager wants to get the best out of wingers or players who like to play with a lot of freedom and think they need two others in there to do the hard work and stay back”

The Box to Box Midfielder, which was once a burgeoning trade, is now lost in the din of many other similar positions that have been victims of evolution (most notably, the Trequartista.) Gone are those days, when one would see a certain Roy Keane drive the crowd into a frenzy with his never-ending cistern of energy, or a Patrick Vieria, setting Highbury into a dizzy with his unmatchable zest and zeal. As Jose Mourinho points out -

“In football we have attacking midfielders and we have defensive midfielders but there are very few what they call in England box-to-box midfielders. It is very difficult to find the complete midfielder who is defensively strong and who can also attack and arrive in the box and score goals.”

Who knows? Another evolution, and maybe, just maybe – the Box to Box Midfielder would be back in the frame, again.