Oscar Bobb

[bencher]

It's a double pivot for a reason, and not designed to score goals.

I agree with this. In our set-up, I don't think we are set in a way that enables the two in a midfield pivot to score a lot of goals. I do think they need to score some goals, but I can't see how, without changing our system, we can get a lot of goals from central midfield. We also have 4 players in front of the pivot. I think that should be enough firepower to break most teams. Plus, I think Lukic's goal contributions have actually been fine this season. 2 goals + 2 assists while he missed quite a lot of games through suspension/injury. That's actually same as Iwobi for example, who played at the wing in a lot of matches.

The midfielder we should get is someone who is defensively good, but a more progressive passer than Berge and Lukic. We don't need someone who'll score double digit goals. The other option would be to change our system to 4-3-3 and play with a single dm. If we do that, we'd probably need to get more than 1 new midfielder.

Good point about Lukic. I think there is a bit of inventiveness that he brings to the table as well. I still remember the brilliant assist to Muniz last season at Chelsea away.

For me, if I didn't go on the internet, I'd never know the Lukic-Berge would even be an issue. Even more so that so many Fulham supporters are unhappy with Berge. It boggles my mind as a supporter, a former collegiate player and current youth coach. He is exactly what I'd want any 6 to play like within the system Marco has set up. His scanning ability alone is at the highest level. Look at Reed's goal yesterday where their midfielder, Seko, simply stopped after his initial scan - leaving no time for a crucial scan, let alone preparing for Reed to just bust through. I've seen posts blaming the keeper, but that is 100% the midfielder's fault. Berge is put in those scenarios every single match and has never messed up such a high pressure moment.

If we ever look at more of a destroyer position, then someone like Morton Frendrup for me has always come to mind. He won't win many aerial duels, but he will be the workhorse that everyone seems to want for Fulham. The trade-off there will be losing the link play that Berge provides because Frendrup doesn't complete as many long ground passes in comparison.

I think the more it's realized how valuable the controller type player Berge is, the more this kind of narrative can be put to bed. At this level, passing the ball isn't as simple as see it and pass it, it's whether knowing your pass is going to put the recipient under immediate pressure or not. The way he dictates play is the kind of way only someone that played higher up in the lines would be appreciative of.

I don't mind having the double pivot per se, it is needed in quite a lot of games, but it would be a big help if one of those midfielders had a dangerous shot on them from outside the area. One of the things JP added was he was capable of scoring from 25 yards, and did a few times. Our pair don't even bother trying because they presumably don't back themselves to trouble the goalkeeper. The double pivot see so much of the ball but if they would shoot a bit the midfielders wouldn't be able to double up on our wing play as much. Reed is able to score his equalizer against Liverpool because the press is doubled up on the wing, and no one, especially me, expected him to have a go. In addition, even if you don't score directly, it creates some chaos, where deflections can deceive the keeper, or the keeper spills it and a forward has a tap in. Look how much joy Aston Villa get from shooting outside the box, with Tielemans, McGinn and Rogers all having a pop regularly.

[Matt10]

It's a double pivot for a reason, and not designed to score goals.

I agree with this. In our set-up, I don't think we are set in a way that enables the two in a midfield pivot to score a lot of goals. I do think they need to score some goals, but I can't see how, without changing our system, we can get a lot of goals from central midfield. We also have 4 players in front of the pivot. I think that should be enough firepower to break most teams. Plus, I think Lukic's goal contributions have actually been fine this season. 2 goals + 2 assists while he missed quite a lot of games through suspension/injury. That's actually same as Iwobi for example, who played at the wing in a lot of matches.

The midfielder we should get is someone who is defensively good, but a more progressive passer than Berge and Lukic. We don't need someone who'll score double digit goals. The other option would be to change our system to 4-3-3 and play with a single dm. If we do that, we'd probably need to get more than 1 new midfielder.

Good point about Lukic. I think there is a bit of inventiveness that he brings to the table as well. I still remember the brilliant assist to Muniz last season at Chelsea away.

For me, if I didn't go on the internet, I'd never know the Lukic-Berge would even be an issue. Even more so that so many Fulham supporters are unhappy with Berge. It boggles my mind as a supporter, a former collegiate player and current youth coach. He is exactly what I'd want any 6 to play like within the system Marco has set up. His scanning ability alone is at the highest level. Look at Reed's goal yesterday where their midfielder, Seko, simply stopped after his initial scan - leaving no time for a crucial scan, let alone preparing for Reed to just bust through. I've seen posts blaming the keeper, but that is 100% the midfielder's fault. Berge is put in those scenarios every single match and has never messed up such a high pressure moment.

If we ever look at more of a destroyer position, then someone like Morton Frendrup for me has always come to mind. He won't win many aerial duels, but he will be the workhorse that everyone seems to want for Fulham. The trade-off there will be losing the link play that Berge provides because Frendrup doesn't complete as many long ground passes in comparison.

I think the more it's realized how valuable the controller type player Berge is, the more this kind of narrative can be put to bed. At this level, passing the ball isn't as simple as see it and pass it, it's whether knowing your pass is going to put the recipient under immediate pressure or not. The way he dictates play is the kind of way only someone that played higher up in the lines would be appreciative of.

I don't mind having the double pivot per se, it is needed in quite a lot of games, but it would be a big help if one of those midfielders had a dangerous shot on them from outside the area. One of the things JP added was he was capable of scoring from 25 yards, and did a few times. Our pair don't even bother trying because they presumably don't back themselves to trouble the goalkeeper. The double pivot see so much of the ball but if they would shoot a bit the midfielders wouldn't be able to double up on our wing play as much. Reed is able to score his equalizer against Liverpool because the press is doubled up on the wing, and no one, especially me, expected him to have a go. In addition, even if you don't score directly, it creates some chaos, where deflections can deceive the keeper, or the keeper spills it and a forward has a tap in. Look how much joy Aston Villa get from shooting outside the box, with Tielemans, McGinn and Rogers all having a pop regularly.

I agree, I wish they would shoot more often because they are players that may need more sample size. We all know what Berge is capable of as our past opponent, and Lukic has shown he can score goals in the premier league as well as internationally. I think Reed is a corner case more than anything based on the match scenario (Liverpool dying minutes, Stoke championship level), but regardless no one can take away the 2 goals that he has scored - and that should put pressure on Berge to maybe take more chances.

[Milo]

We are a CM, RB, and CF away from a complete team ready to challenge consistently for Europe.

[LittleErn]

We rarely give the ball away in central midfield yet it needs major surgery. It's a double pivot for a reason, and not designed to score goals.

Reed was good yesterday but he capitalized on terrible midfielder awareness, while also terribly chasing shadows on the goal we conceded.

I think we are missing Lukic quite a lot actually. Not just in his aggression but his ability to find a pass and break lines through his dribbling.

Please explain to an 85 year old dinosaur what a "pivot" and a "double pivot" are (in football of course) and what these positions used to be called.

[General]

We are a CM, RB, and CF away from a complete team ready to challenge consistently for Europe.

I think if we kept Tete and Castagne fit, then we'd not need a RB, just a CM, and CF

Pepi and one young dynamic box to box who can score goals

[btffc]

We are a CM, RB, and CF away from a complete team ready to challenge consistently for Europe.

I think if we kept Tete and Castagne fit, then we'd not need a RB, just a CM, and CF

Pepi and one young dynamic box to box who can score goals

Castagne is 30 and has declined a little bit each year he's been here. A trend that's likely to continue.

Tete is 30 and has had an injury that's caused him to miss significant time each of the last 8 years.

We should really replace one of them. Most likely Castagne since he's worse and has lass time on his contract.

[Rambler]

I agree, a CM, CF and RB.

Ideally add in another CM and replace one of our CBs and a new GK.

Then we have a really competitive team.

[Somerset Fulham]

I agree, a CM, CF and RB.

Ideally add in another CM and replace one of our CBs and a new GK.

Then we have a really competitive team.

So six out of the first eleven?

Thats more of a rebuild than a quick couple of additions. 

[Woolly Mammoth]

All food for thought for us all, and there is a common denominator.
That it is agreed that surgery needs to be done.
Certainly a Striker/Centre forward, also a playmaker/ an attacking CM, and an upgrade on first choice goalkeeper for all the reasons previously mentioned by my colleagues and associates on this forum.
Always remember that injuries play a key part during a hectic season, so we have to be prepared for the unexpected.
Hence why a RB is needed for next season, as Timothy has started to look vulnerable in a similar way to Bert.
We cannot stand still as we risk being overtaken.
We have to have ambition, being content with just surviving and a couldn't care less attitude to Cup Competitions is a recipe for failure and the rot sets in.
Winning can become a habit with the right characters and leaders in the team, in the same way as losing becomes a habit. Beware the Ides of March especially for losers.
If you do not believe me ask Julius Caesar.

[Neutral Zone Ultra]

We rarely give the ball away in central midfield yet it needs major surgery. It's a double pivot for a reason, and not designed to score goals.

Reed was good yesterday but he capitalized on terrible midfielder awareness, while also terribly chasing shadows on the goal we conceded.

I think we are missing Lukic quite a lot actually. Not just in his aggression but his ability to find a pass and break lines through his dribbling.

Please explain to an 85 year old dinosaur what a "pivot" and a "double pivot" are (in football of course) and what these positions used to be called.

I'm 26 and I haven't got a clue what "pivot" means, in my mind it's defensive/holding midfielders, attacking midfielders and maybe box-to-box midfielders.

[hopper]

It's a double pivot for a reason, and not designed to score goals.

I agree with this. In our set-up, I don't think we are set in a way that enables the two in a midfield pivot to score a lot of goals. I do think they need to score some goals, but I can't see how, without changing our system, we can get a lot of goals from central midfield. We also have 4 players in front of the pivot. I think that should be enough firepower to break most teams. Plus, I think Lukic's goal contributions have actually been fine this season. 2 goals + 2 assists while he missed quite a lot of games through suspension/injury. That's actually same as Iwobi for example, who played at the wing in a lot of matches.

The midfielder we should get is someone who is defensively good, but a more progressive passer than Berge and Lukic. We don't need someone who'll score double digit goals. The other option would be to change our system to 4-3-3 and play with a single dm. If we do that, we'd probably need to get more than 1 new midfielder.

Good point about Lukic. I think there is a bit of inventiveness that he brings to the table as well. I still remember the brilliant assist to Muniz last season at Chelsea away.

For me, if I didn't go on the internet, I'd never know the Lukic-Berge would even be an issue. Even more so that so many Fulham supporters are unhappy with Berge. It boggles my mind as a supporter, a former collegiate player and current youth coach. He is exactly what I'd want any 6 to play like within the system Marco has set up. His scanning ability alone is at the highest level. Look at Reed's goal yesterday where their midfielder, Seko, simply stopped after his initial scan - leaving no time for a crucial scan, let alone preparing for Reed to just bust through. I've seen posts blaming the keeper, but that is 100% the midfielder's fault. Berge is put in those scenarios every single match and has never messed up such a high pressure moment.

If we ever look at more of a destroyer position, then someone like Morton Frendrup for me has always come to mind. He won't win many aerial duels, but he will be the workhorse that everyone seems to want for Fulham. The trade-off there will be losing the link play that Berge provides because Frendrup doesn't complete as many long ground passes in comparison.

I think the more it's realized how valuable the controller type player Berge is, the more this kind of narrative can be put to bed. At this level, passing the ball isn't as simple as see it and pass it, it's whether knowing your pass is going to put the recipient under immediate pressure or not. The way he dictates play is the kind of way only someone that played higher up in the lines would be appreciative of.

Great post @Matt10 - agree with every word. I'm surprised at some of the criticism Sander gets. He plays his role very well I think.

[hopper]

I think pivot means someone or two plays who hold a position quite deep and try and recycle the ball quickly, especially wide.

So it's a contrast to 'box to box midfielder.

That's the impression I get.

[Woolly Mammoth]

A pivot is
A central defensive midfielder who acts as the "axis" of the team, sitting just in front of the defenders to control the game's tempo, break up play, and connect defence with attack.

[Matt10]

We rarely give the ball away in central midfield yet it needs major surgery. It's a double pivot for a reason, and not designed to score goals.

Reed was good yesterday but he capitalized on terrible midfielder awareness, while also terribly chasing shadows on the goal we conceded.

I think we are missing Lukic quite a lot actually. Not just in his aggression but his ability to find a pass and break lines through his dribbling.

Please explain to an 85 year old dinosaur what a "pivot" and a "double pivot" are (in football of course) and what these positions used to be called.

I'm 26 and I haven't got a clue what "pivot" means, in my mind it's defensive/holding midfielders, attacking midfielders and maybe box-to-box midfielders.

Yes correct. The internet tacticos have really brought it more into the limelight so to speak. I try to focus relative to the system that I believe our manager plays - and always acknowledging that he doesn't play "stock" formation -> tactics , so analysis has to be done within the match context a lot of the time.

Adding on to what Wooly said is that yes it's an "axis" of the team - that sits in front of the defensive line. A 4-1-4-1 formation is a direct way of looking at it, where the first "1" in that is the defensive midfielder, or commonly known as the 6 - which is the single pivot. I believe in the past a "wing-half" or "half-back" can be referenced, but I haven't heard it called that in a long time. I actually reached out to one of my coaching mentors to answer this question.


Single Pivot or Pivot in a 4-1-4-1 formation

With Marco's system we have a 4-2-3-1, or a 4-3-3 with the assumption of a 4-2-3-1 in most build-up stages and pyramid/triangle passing positions. The double pivot are the two defensive midfielders playing as a "6", so Lukic and Berge, but what changes about them is their job/role. Without being privvy to Marco's notebook, I'd assume that Sander Berge is your deep-lying playmaker, or "Regista", who is focused primarily in setting the tempo and distribution, so a lot of one-and-two touch backfoot receiving to keep the flow of the passing movement.

From there, the second 6 is Lukic - which is what makes the system now a double pivot. This is where I think our identity in the double pivot is a bit of a struggle to understand. The common role should be the destroyer, someone who is mainly focused on winning the ball, breaking up sequences, etc, but while he tries his best at being that player - Lukic is also someone who has a freedom to roam quite a bit. He is a bit of what is called an Anchor Man, someone who usually stays in front of the defensive line, and connects with the playmaker in Berge. In Marco's system though, Lukic has so much freedom in the build up and deeper attacks he transitions to more of an 8. It's actually what is missing so badly from our team right now that range of ability to be a 6 and an 8. Iwobi is getting better, but he's 90% an 8 and 10% a 6. Marco had him on the left midfield with freedom on that side to tuck or get wide for quite a bit - so the sooner Lukic can return, the better in my opinion.


Double Pivot in a 4-2-3-1 formation

I know it's not relevant to the question, but this is why last season I was convinced we were playing two 8's with Pereira in the center midfield and ESR in the left midfielder position. So when we would move into our build up in the middle-to-attacking third, we'd leave our 6 as a single pivot, and those two players in Pereira and ESR would become the two 8's. I believe Marco used this approach when Iwobi was playing left midfield more, but it depended on what he would do with the left wingback in Jedi or Sess.

The way Marco's system is designed is one that has so much fluctuation throughout a match. The "stock" look is that 4-2-3-1 with the double pivot, but with the roaming freedom he gives the second 6, whether that be Lukic or Iwobi, can change the entire look in different parts of the pitch.

I hope that helps and doesn't come off as a know-it-all or condescending - I just wanted to answer the question a bit better. I apologize for not being more clear in my previous posts. Sometimes I type too fast for my own good and get too excited to talk Fulham footy.

[Simply91]

We rarely give the ball away in central midfield yet it needs major surgery. It's a double pivot for a reason, and not designed to score goals.

Reed was good yesterday but he capitalized on terrible midfielder awareness, while also terribly chasing shadows on the goal we conceded.

I think we are missing Lukic quite a lot actually. Not just in his aggression but his ability to find a pass and break lines through his dribbling.

Does anyone know when Lukic is due back?

[SerbianLad]

Does anyone know when Lukic is due back?

I think Marco originally said it will be at least 4-5 weeks, and we're nearing the 5 week mark now. So hopefully he'll be back soon.

[Snibbo]

Does anyone know when Lukic is due back?

I think Marco originally said it will be at least 4-5 weeks, and we're nearing the 5 week mark now. So hopefully he'll be back soon.

No sign of him that I could see in the recent Motspur Parklife vid, so seems like not even back in training.

[cookieg]

Double pivot, deep lying playmaker. Whatever happened to jumpers for goal posts?

[iansthailand]

We rarely give the ball away in central midfield yet it needs major surgery. It's a double pivot for a reason, and not designed to score goals.

Reed was good yesterday but he capitalized on terrible midfielder awareness, while also terribly chasing shadows on the goal we conceded.

I think we are missing Lukic quite a lot actually. Not just in his aggression but his ability to find a pass and break lines through his dribbling.

Does anyone know when Lukic is due back?

When he finds his pivot underneath a divot or a double divot

We rarely give the ball away in central midfield yet it needs major surgery. It's a double pivot for a reason, and not designed to score goals.

Reed was good yesterday but he capitalized on terrible midfielder awareness, while also terribly chasing shadows on the goal we conceded.

I think we are missing Lukic quite a lot actually. Not just in his aggression but his ability to find a pass and break lines through his dribbling.

Does anyone know when Lukic is due back?

[SG]

We rarely give the ball away in central midfield yet it needs major surgery. It's a double pivot for a reason, and not designed to score goals.

Reed was good yesterday but he capitalized on terrible midfielder awareness, while also terribly chasing shadows on the goal we conceded.

I think we are missing Lukic quite a lot actually. Not just in his aggression but his ability to find a pass and break lines through his dribbling.

Please explain to an 85 year old dinosaur what a "pivot" and a "double pivot" are (in football of course) and what these positions used to be called.

I'm 26 and I haven't got a clue what "pivot" means, in my mind it's defensive/holding midfielders, attacking midfielders and maybe box-to-box midfielders.

Yes correct. The internet tacticos have really brought it more into the limelight so to speak. I try to focus relative to the system that I believe our manager plays - and always acknowledging that he doesn't play "stock" formation -> tactics , so analysis has to be done within the match context a lot of the time.

Adding on to what Wooly said is that yes it's an "axis" of the team - that sits in front of the defensive line. A 4-1-4-1 formation is a direct way of looking at it, where the first "1" in that is the defensive midfielder, or commonly known as the 6 - which is the single pivot. I believe in the past a "wing-half" or "half-back" can be referenced, but I haven't heard it called that in a long time. I actually reached out to one of my coaching mentors to answer this question.


Single Pivot or Pivot in a 4-1-4-1 formation

With Marco's system we have a 4-2-3-1, or a 4-3-3 with the assumption of a 4-2-3-1 in most build-up stages and pyramid/triangle passing positions. The double pivot are the two defensive midfielders playing as a "6", so Lukic and Berge, but what changes about them is their job/role. Without being privvy to Marco's notebook, I'd assume that Sander Berge is your deep-lying playmaker, or "Regista", who is focused primarily in setting the tempo and distribution, so a lot of one-and-two touch backfoot receiving to keep the flow of the passing movement.

From there, the second 6 is Lukic - which is what makes the system now a double pivot. This is where I think our identity in the double pivot is a bit of a struggle to understand. The common role should be the destroyer, someone who is mainly focused on winning the ball, breaking up sequences, etc, but while he tries his best at being that player - Lukic is also someone who has a freedom to roam quite a bit. He is a bit of what is called an Anchor Man, someone who usually stays in front of the defensive line, and connects with the playmaker in Berge. In Marco's system though, Lukic has so much freedom in the build up and deeper attacks he transitions to more of an 8. It's actually what is missing so badly from our team right now that range of ability to be a 6 and an 8. Iwobi is getting better, but he's 90% an 8 and 10% a 6. Marco had him on the left midfield with freedom on that side to tuck or get wide for quite a bit - so the sooner Lukic can return, the better in my opinion.


Double Pivot in a 4-2-3-1 formation

I know it's not relevant to the question, but this is why last season I was convinced we were playing two 8's with Pereira in the center midfield and ESR in the left midfielder position. So when we would move into our build up in the middle-to-attacking third, we'd leave our 6 as a single pivot, and those two players in Pereira and ESR would become the two 8's. I believe Marco used this approach when Iwobi was playing left midfield more, but it depended on what he would do with the left wingback in Jedi or Sess.

The way Marco's system is designed is one that has so much fluctuation throughout a match. The "stock" look is that 4-2-3-1 with the double pivot, but with the roaming freedom he gives the second 6, whether that be Lukic or Iwobi, can change the entire look in different parts of the pitch.

I hope that helps and doesn't come off as a know-it-all or condescending - I just wanted to answer the question a bit better. I apologize for not being more clear in my previous posts. Sometimes I type too fast for my own good and get too excited to talk Fulham footy.

Thank you - I understand that now. And to think I used to coach at a reasonable youth level many years ago !!