Most important position?

[Effercon]

For me, it's a toss-up between full-back and central midfielder. In the modern game, this are the two positions expected to provide a two-way threat.

[cgf]

No such thing. Especially as the game continues more and more down the path of versatility and specialists die even harder.

[Slava]

Goal keeper.

I usually play center back but when I tried out for my university team they had only one other guy trying for goal keeper spot and the squad had one spot open at goalie, so I decided to try as one. Needless to say, most humiliating 15 mins of my life.

[kdawg32086]

No such thing. Especially as the game continues more and more down the path of versatility and specialists die even harder.

Agreed, a lot of it depends on formations/tactics now. The most important position will likely be variable from game to game.

[Foye]

Defensive midfielder. I have to play it for my new club but I hate it.

You are always under pressure in the middle and if you make one mistake it will almost surely result in a goal.
On top of it you always have to be be back in your own half within a few seconds if someone loses the ball.

I would much rather play on the wing.

[Javanar]

Defensive midfielder( or midfield sweeper ) in most of the systems/formations. Player in that position is an anchor, affects the position & performance of all midfielders & defenders.

IMO, full-back is the easiest position to play.

[5DOM]

It really does depend on the system, but usually the DM for me as well. It probably tops other positions in terms of touches and pitch coverage. I'd say the striker position is perhaps the least important.

[MaliBrah]

central midfielder , thats where you win or lose games , you dominate the mid then your forwards will see a lot of the ball and your defenders wont get threatened much. If you get dominated in midfield then vice versa happens.

[Slava]

Defensive mid wasn't even a designated position until Makelele made it popular. More teams played with box to box players before that and did pretty well.

Center mid might be the correct term here.

[Point forward]

Hard to say, but I will say GK. If you got a super GK, you only need one guy who scores the 1:0, and your goalie will rake in the clean sheet. Chelsea did it with Cech, Bayern with Kahn and Neuer, Spain is unbeatable with (prime) Casillas, and ManU only won in Europe with studs like Schmeichel and VDS.

Re: central midfield - I think that the difference between the #1 and the #5 playmaker is much smaller than the #1 and #5 goalie. Personally, I would rather have the best goalie in the world and "just" a good CM than vice versa.

[Foye]

Defensive midfielder( or midfield sweeper ) in most of the systems/formations. Player in that position is an anchor, affects the position & performance of all midfielders & defenders.

IMO, full-back is the easiest position to play.

I'd say playing well as a FB is rather difficult. You have to help initiating attacks and at the same time you always need to hurry back at full speed.

The easiest position for me is striker. You can just let the game come to you and wait for your chance to score. Plus, even if you make a mistake there are 10 guys behind you who can make up for it.

[bbms]

There's no such thing. Football is a game that you just need one play, any time in the game, to win. Dominance is not what wins games in football, but making the opportunities you got, doesn't matter if they are 2 or 20.

But, if you want dominance, in today's football, probably central midfield. The only position that can impact the play of every other position. The CMs are in a position to protect the CBs with positioning, win possessions via marking an tackling, keep possessions via short passing, link counter-attacks with long passes, and score by attacking the box. Involved at every phase of the game. QB in american football. Any world class player can impact the game to offset the impact from CM, and a lot of tactics can overcome some CM's deficit.

Defensive mid wasn't even a designated position until Makelele made it popular. More teams played with box to box players before that and did pretty well.

That's not true. DM in Brazil was first used in late 60s to contain Pelé. They used to believe if you placed an extra defender between the midfield and the CBs, they would limit his space and make him fight harder for goals. It wasn't even an attempt to nullify Pelé, it was just to get him more and more tired. I usually say that the now obsolete position, sweeper, was inverted in Brazil. Here the Sweeper player in front of the CBs, not behind them. In Brazil a lot of people call the DM as "terceiro zagueiro"(third cb). Culture created by Pelé.

"Number 5"(traditional number for the Holding Midfield in Brazil), was always the guy who took care of the traditional "Number 10", the trequartista. Long tradition of Zito, Dino Zani, Doriva, Denilson, Clodoaldo, Carlos Alberto Pintinho, Batista, Adílio, Mauro Silva, Dunga, Gilberto Silva, Emerson... 50 years of tradition. Lots of people give the blame for that 1982 loss to the lack of a true "Number 5".

IMO, full-back is the easiest position to play.

I don't agree. How many full backs in the world can actually defend the position properly? It's incredibly hard to defend at this position, believe me. The easiest imo is CB. If you are tall, fairly good at tackling and always well positioned, no coach will ever sack you out.

[AdamTheGreek]

Goalkeeper and then defensive midfield because that's a position that is expected to be great at distribution now as well.

[Javanar]

Defensive mid wasn't even a designated position until Makelele made it popular. More teams played with box to box players before that and did pretty well.

Center mid might be the correct term here.

Speaking of Europe, 1994 WC is the turning point as I know. In Europe, 3-5-2 was touted as the best tactic in those days, after the unexpected success of Denmark national team in Euro 92. In 1994 WC, Parreira & Zagallo placed the sweeper in front of the defensive line, rather than behind( As the previous poster said, it has roots that reach to 60's ). That resulted in better defense, and one more man in the midfield.

After 94 WC, that position became so popular in Europe as well.

[Slava]

I don't know if you can call the sweeper in a 3-5-2 to be same as the defensive midfielder in a 4-1-3-2 employed by people like Mourinho in mid 00s. That's two different variations imo.

[Javanar]

IMO, full-back is the easiest position to play.

I don't agree. How many full backs in the world can actually defend the position properly? It's incredibly hard to defend at this position, believe me. The easiest imo is CB. If you are tall, fairly good at tackling and always well positioned, no coach will ever sack you out.

Nah, CB is one of the most difficult positions in football. First you need to find tall players, then that tall player should also have some size. These are the physical requirements.

Tall players are usually slow, but forwards are usually quick and pacey players. That points to another requirement. Especially in a defensive line with 4 players, slow center-backs can cause lots of problems. If you have slow central defenders you need to play with a deep defensive line and you should have a really good defensive midfielder. And playing with a deep defensive line can cause problems : 1) stretches the distance between your defenders & midfielders 2) and implicitly stretches the distance between midfielders & forwards. Those two mean a lot of space for opposition team to play with the ball, and in turn you need to run more and spend more energy to cover that distance. And in attack mode you need pacey forwards and wingers in those kind of game... A good CB should really have some speed, or you will have lots of head-aches .

CB's should be really good at positioning and that needs experience, fundametals and good instincts. You should have some Football IQ to play as a CB.

In todays football, (especially teams trying to play total football, Barcelona, Bayern, Netherlands NT...), there is a need for ball playing CB's. There is a reason Guardiola used Mascherano as a centre-back in Barcelona.

As a result there are alot of requirements to be a successful CB. It is not an easy position to play.

In turn, to be a succesful full-back you need to be quick, careful and good at crossing the ball. Some tackling & positioning ability is needed as well. This is a rather minimal feature-set compared to other positions. That is why I think playing as a FB is easier.

[Javanar]

I don't know if you can call the sweeper in a 3-5-2 to be same as the defensive midfielder in a 4-1-3-2 employed by people like Mourinho in mid 00s. That's two different variations imo.

Those two positions are absolutely different.

In 3-5-2 ; sweepers clear the ball & forwards if they pass beyond central defenders. A defensive midfielder prevents those kind of attacks from happening. I mean it is like a preemptive strike. Rather than struggling against the threat, you take precautions agains that threat. A risky way but proved to be better...

Patrick Vieira is the man I think as an ideal defensive midfielder. Maybe that makes the things more clear.

[Slava]

I don't know if you can call the sweeper in a 3-5-2 to be same as the defensive midfielder in a 4-1-3-2 employed by people like Mourinho in mid 00s. That's two different variations imo.

Those two positions are absolutely different.

In 3-5-2 ; sweepers clear the ball & forwards if they pass beyond central defenders. A defensive midfielder prevents those kind of attacks from happening. I mean it is like a preemptive strike. Rather than struggling against the threat, you take precautions agains that threat. A risky way but proved to be better...

Patrick Vieira is the man I think as an ideal defensive midfielder. Maybe that makes the things more clear.

Vieira and Keane played more like box to box players. They were more central mids in my opinion. When I think of defensive mid, its players like Gattuso, Makelele, Mascherano, Mikel, Ince, to some extent Busquets that come to mind, players who shield the back 4 and effectively play to nullify the opposition's #10 and at the same time would not be of much use further forward.

This is in itself a very specialized role that you cannot list as being the most difficult position to play in football.

[Javanar]

I don't know if you can call the sweeper in a 3-5-2 to be same as the defensive midfielder in a 4-1-3-2 employed by people like Mourinho in mid 00s. That's two different variations imo.

Those two positions are absolutely different.

In 3-5-2 ; sweepers clear the ball & forwards if they pass beyond central defenders. A defensive midfielder prevents those kind of attacks from happening. I mean it is like a preemptive strike. Rather than struggling against the threat, you take precautions agains that threat. A risky way but proved to be better...

Patrick Vieira is the man I think as an ideal defensive midfielder. Maybe that makes the things more clear.

Vieira and Keane played more like box to box players. They were more central mids in my opinion. When I think of defensive mid, its players like Gattuso, Makelele, Mascherano, Mikel, Ince, to some extent Busquets that come to mind, players who shield the back 4 and effectively play to nullify the opposition's #10 and at the same time would not be of much use further forward.

This is in itself a very specialized role that you cannot list as being the most difficult position to play in football.

I do not think Keane and Vieira played as b2b players. Especially Vieira... Lampard, Gerrard, Xavi, Fabregas, Ballack, Essien, Selcuk Inan, Vidal, Pogba, Ilkay Gundogan can be considered as box to box midfielders. Vieira was an ideal defensive midfielder.

[bbms]

I don't know if you can call the sweeper in a 3-5-2 to be same as the defensive midfielder in a 4-1-3-2 employed by people like Mourinho in mid 00s. That's two different variations imo.

Sure. But it's easier to see that when you think about Beckenbauer, who had his time as a sweeper and first man in the midfield. Now imagine at some point, would rather have an extra man in the midfield instead of one cleaner behind, so you just invert the position, insted of placing him right behind the CBs, you place him right in front of the CBs. The point is: you call him an "inverted sweeper", because despite the fact he's a midfield, he's not in charge of man to man marking, but coverage.

Busquets is clearly an "inverted sweeper", "terceiro zagueiro"(third cb), first man in the midfield. A defensive midfield who is in charge most of all for coverage. I think that's why English national team has a lot of difficulties to thrive in international football despite amazing talent and potential. Both of their most defensive midfielders play a lot of man to man marking and none coverage. That's a hell of an important duty for sure, bot not that hard to play.

Also, it's not true to say 94 was the turning point. There was tiny separation of Beckenbauer from a defensive midfielder to a sweeper, which by definition makes him a coverage midfielder, or a "more outgoing sweeper". Marco Tardelli for Italy 82. Batista for Argentina in 86.