Attacking fullbacks

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


Actually, despite operating in different stratospheres, Wilder and the Italian do share more in common than a propensity to get wound-up during games. Both sit on top of their respective divisions. Both have breathed new life into under-performing squads. But perhaps the most obvious link between them is their preference for a 3-5-2 system and, scrolling back six months or so, the circumstances which prompted them to implement it.

Wilder privately outlined plans to play with three centres-halves and two wing-backs within days of taking charge in May. Like Conte, however, he initially decided against going down this route and resolved to organise his team in a traditional 4-4-2 shape instead. The tipping point came following a 2-1 defeat at Millwall which, after a desparetely slow start to the season, left United propping-up the rest of the League One after four games. Less than 40 days later, and six miles across London, Conte also decided to trust his own instincts after being thrashed by Arsenal. The rest, at Bramall Lane and also Stamford Bridge, is history.​
 
Good article. One of the best World Cup goals was scored by Carlos Alberto in the 1970 World Cup final. Pele almost instinctively knew that Alberto would be arriving on his right hand side.

From our point of view Len Badger would have always been described as an 'overlapping full back'. Similar role different job title.
 
The interesting thing to me is that the attacking wing backs are part of the mid field and to cover this you need flexibility in the three centre backs where the vacant wide sides need to be covered. The wing backs do need to track back and this releases one of the centre backs to move forward so in effect always three defending. You certainly need high energy wing backs and that's why Kelly in the Under 23s is so effective
It was interesting to me that Rangers used both wing backs attacking at the same time to get promoted but came unstuck at the higher level.
The difference is that to play this way needs three good centre backs and again the 23 s have players to cope with this style
I love watching both our teams play this way.
 
Last season i watched Kieron Freeman under Adkins and noticed that time and time that he would get caught woefully out of position as we always seemed to concede goals down his side, but this season he has been the player who has had the most benefit from the change of system as it has allowed to him to push forward without having to curb his attacking instincts and allowed him to be a lot more expressive as when he break forward the system allows a defender to move over to cover his defensive work when he is caught out of position.

The other thing i like about this system is that it effectively compresses the pitch as we play with a high line, and often presses the opposition in to mistakes as time and space in the midfield is often at a premium.
 
One thing that we unfortunately don't have in common, is the value of the squad.
 
In the days prior to the 1966 World Cup the most common formation was what was known as a 'W' formation.

That was a 3 at the back, 5 in midfield (with two wide players being wingers/half backs, and 2 up front.

It's still the best if you have the right players to do it.

Since we put Wright back into the centre we've improved defensively. Because he knows how to read the game and position himself. I've also been impressed with how he wins aerial balls despite not being particularly tall or brawny.

O Connell, to me, is a fine centre half and he's been absolutely brilliant at left back too.

Freeman has done really well getting into good positions in the box but he really needs to improve on his final ball into the box.
 
brownie said:
Last season i watched Kieron Freeman under Adkins and noticed that time and time that he would get caught woefully out of position as we always seemed to concede goals down his side, but this season he has been the player who has had the most benefit from the change of system as it has allowed to him to push forward without having to curb his attacking instincts and allowed him to be a lot more expressive as when he break forward the system allows a defender to move over to cover his defensive work when he is caught out of position.

The other thing i like about this system is that it effectively compresses the pitch as we play with a high line, and often presses the opposition in to mistakes as time and space in the midfield is often at a premium.
Click to expand...


Interesting observation - at the start of the season we were playing a similar high line with a back 4. Brayford & Hussey didn't seem to be able to keep up though. And we ultimately got trounced every single game.
 
Cerberus Blade said:
In the days prior to the 1966 World Cup the most common formation was what was known as a 'W' formation.

That was a 3 at the back, 5 in midfield (with two wide players being wingers/half backs, and 2 up front.

It's still the best if you have the right players to do it.

Since we put Wright back into the centre we've improved defensively. Because he knows how to read the game and position himself. I've also been impressed with how he wins aerial balls despite not being particularly tall or brawny.

O Connell, to me, is a fine centre half and he's been absolutely brilliant at left back too.

Freeman has done really well getting into good positions in the box but he really needs to improve on his final ball into the box.
Click to expand...

Wrights positioning is probably the best I've seen in a defender at this level. How he closes down and cuts the passing lanes for the man on the ball is genius.
 
Cerberus Blade said:
In the days prior to the 1966 World Cup the most common formation was what was known as a 'W' formation.

That was a 3 at the back, 5 in midfield (with two wide players being wingers/half backs, and 2 up front.

It's still the best if you have the right players to do it.

Since we put Wright back into the centre we've improved defensively. Because he knows how to read the game and position himself. I've also been impressed with how he wins aerial balls despite not being particularly tall or brawny.

O Connell, to me, is a fine centre half and he's been absolutely brilliant at left back too.

Freeman has done really well getting into good positions in the box but he really needs to improve on his final ball into the box.
Click to expand...
Really going back it was 2, 3, and 5 Thats how the original numbers on shirts came about. 2 and 3 fullbacks 4,5, and 6 Half backs (Centre back was Centre half) and 7 to 11 for two wingers two inside forwards and number 9 for a big Centre forward. Sadly squad numbers put paid to that. I often wonder if it would work today
 
Baw Heid said:
Really going back it was 2, 3, and 5 Thats how the original numbers on shirts came about. 2 and 3 fullbacks 4,5, and 6 Half backs (Centre back was Centre half) and 7 to 11 for two wingers two inside forwards and number 9 for a big Centre forward. Sadly squad numbers put paid to that. I often wonder if it would work today
Click to expand...
It worked in the eighties when we played 442. Full backs were 2 and 3, centre halves were 5&6 (I think) defensive mid was 4, attacking mid was 8, strikers 9&10 and wingers 7&11.

But I don't think they had names on their shirts in those days. (They probably did but I was short sighted and for some reason didn't know until I was about 17/18 so watched a lot of games with shit eyes).
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom