Yes, I know - not another thread. I cannot claim to have read ALL the threads concerning the above, but what I have read has got me to thinking about the arguments of both sides.
The warlord is the closest you can have in the way of what you are describing, if not what you want. Start with the following, what are the properties that define a controller? a leader?
As per PHB: Controllers deal with large numbers of enemies at the same time. They favor offense over defense, using powers that deal damage to multiple foes at once, as well as subtler powers that weaken, confuse, or delay their foes. By contrast, Leaders inspire, heal and aid the other characters in an adventuring group. Leaders have good defenses, but their strength lies in powers that protect their companions and target specific foes for the party to concentrate on. Finally martial is the art of war (NOT considering it mundane).
"The General" is a role sometimes offered as a suggestion for the role. In fact, some have claimed that legend is FILLED with such characters. I disagree. I don't believe there are ANY truly martial controllers present, other than those that employ some form of traps (trapsmith - we'll get back to that). The problem is the scope of the role. Tactics and planning, using your forces to direct and control the enemy is NOT the controller. It is defined as the role of Leader (as it should be, in my opinion). The issue that always arises with the trapsmith is one of devices rather than powers. The only viable translation for the type needed would fall under special weapons training, of which the Retiarius would be the exemplar. Unfortunately, the net-man's net is only a 2x2 area (at most) and they would be of limited use (1/encounter), and would not make a viable class. That leaves the last available, the close burst bladesmith. Here, the issue becomes one of agression. This person would be a front-liner and draw the attention of the enemy. This, however, would require enhanced defenses, and the ability to withstand the resulting onslaught. Well, that defines the defender.
Those are my thoughts. I'm sure there is disagreement. I truly would like to hear more of the opposing view, as I admit I may have overlooked a point or another. However, as stated, I don't believe it is possible. As a result, should one ever arise, I would think that WotC was straying from their own advice, as the role would NOT truly have a unique purpose, but rather was forced together against most sense of logic and/or verisimilitude.