While wing-backs are commonly used in or formations, such as those used by Antonio Conte, they can also be a feature of teams playing with a back four, in a or for example. Liverpool's Premier League-winning team under Jurgen Klopp lined up with a , but full-backs Trent Alexander-Arnold and Andy Robertson pressed so high that they were effectively wing-backs. Indeed, Alexander-Arnold and Robertson set up a combined 25 goals for the Reds on their way to the title in that campaign, while they scored six between them.
Brazil also famously deployed a back four with two flying full-backs - essentially wing-backs - in the form of Roberto Carlos and Cafu on their way to World Cup success in Full-backs and wing-backs play in more or less the same part of the pitch, but there are key differences between the roles within a system. The main difference is that a wing-back has more licence to attack, whereas the full-back has more emphasis on defence.
While full-backs can be encouraged to get forward and help attack on occasion, wing-backs are expected to dictate the attacking width of their team. When Tottenham signed Matt Doherty from Wolves in , he arrived in north London as a player who had played solely as a wing-back in the previous three seasons. This may bring on the question of what happens if a team uses two CDM's, as in a ?
While in some cases this does throw a wrench into my way of thinking, it is also worth considering that in many 2-man CDM partnerships, one of the two is really more of a deep-lying playmaker, while the other is more of the bulldog type; and it would be that bulldog type we would include here. If you want to upset people, suggest that a back 3 is really a MORE defensive tactic. I don't want to turn this into comprehensive breakdown of ramifications of "spare defenders" and single-striker systems and midfield match ups and width, but given that in all but the rarest exceptions the outside mids are expected to help provide wide defensive cover as explained above in the "wingback" definition this seems to have some credence.
The key to running a back three is often on how free your wingbacks are to attack, and your opponent running a narrow system like a midfield diamond or can help this cause. We saw this is Serie A last season, with narrow formations almost de rigeur but a few clever teams decided they could run or similar shapes and allow their wingbacks to run rampant.
Before the season, I suggested that the best way to look at it is that a "back 3" really includes 3 players on the deepest defensive layer and a "back 4" uses 2 players on the deepest defensive layer.
Both use essentially 5 defensive players, just arranged in different configurations. What we are seeing more and more is that the CDM is becoming more of a "sweeper," which is to say an "auxiliary" center back free to push forward into the midfield. This has led to back 4 systems becoming more and more hybridized between a "back 3" with wingbacks and "back 2" with fullbacks and a CDM.
The CDM evolved to counter the classic " 10", "enganche" or "playmaker" but that player has gradually faded away with the decentralization of the playmaker role. But the CDM has stuck around and seems to be evolving into a reprise of the "libero". And here's the crux of the conversation. Asking whether the difference is if wingbacks are really midfielders and fullbacks defenders entirely misses the point, as they are essentially the same player, the difference being the freedom they have to attack based upon who is in the middle of defense and who they have in front of them on the other team.
An opponent with a tridente of a center forward and two forward wingers can pin those wingbacks back, leaving 3 CB's to cover one man in the middle and wingbacks little freedom to go forward; and you find yourself bunkering with 5 defenders. Of course you can respond by freeing a CB into a "libero" and have him essentially become a midfielder, and now you have a back 4 with a spare man - which is always the goal on defense.
A opponent running a diamond would allow those wingabcks a lot of freedom, with their defensive responsibilities primarily being against the opposing fullbacks although the diamond generally calls for fullbacks to push high in support of the narrow midfield ; you have 3 defenders against 2 strikers in the middle, leaving you the desired spare man.
But I digress, as in the interest of keeping this to some reasonable length it simply does not make sense to break down every possible tactical matchup, what I provide above is only for the means of illustrating the greater point.
Fullbacks are pretty important , and the level and style of your fullbacks seems to serve as a pretty good litmus test of the overall quality of the soccer involved.
I think that it could be fairly said that we don't see the type of fullback play at the MLS level that we see in other parts of the world, and this speaks to the overall level of MLS. Fullbacks are so often some of the quickest, fittest, and more well-rounded players in soccer, and are often really box-to-box players. But this isn't to say that MLS fullbacks are unimportant, as few things could be further from the truth.
One thing I have observed from perusing the chalkboards of Sounders matches is how many touches the fullbacks in those matches get, and how it is usually the case that the fullbacks are 2 of the top three in touches in a match - with Alonso at CDM being the other. Good dribbling skills to beat their man to work a good crossing position is also a common trait. This is not to say that traditional fullbacks lack these abilities. However, there is more of an emphasis on these traits in the teams that employ modern, attack minded fullbacks.
The modern fullback is often described as one of the most specialised positions in football. This is because players that play in this position are required to be good in both attack and defence.
Naturally, this requires a great deal of focus and stamina. Wingbacks are commonly used in formations that use 3 central defenders. The wide defenders are pushed higher up the field, usually in the same line as the deep lying midfielders as shown in the image below. A wingback is very similar to a modern fullback. The main difference lies in the offensive aggression that a wingback plays with. However, wingbacks do still have defensive responsibilities. In a defence that uses 2 center backs, fullbacks may drift more centrally to provide cover and track players.
But, because wingbacks are usually employed in formations that use 3 center backs, a wingback stays very close to the touch line to provide as much cover as possible to the widest areas of the pitch. Another benefit of using wingbacks exclusively to provide width is that it means that a team does not require wingers. The team then has the option to add an additional midfielder to the team to increase their chances of winning their midfield battles.
It is widely accepted that midfield battles, more often than not, determine the fate of any given football match. Good examples of players that have played the wingback position in recent years include Marcos Alonso, Allessandro Florenzi, Maicon and Manuel Pasqual. Much like a fullback, a wingback requires high crossing ability, pace and positional awareness.
Many elite players that are natural wingers have had the ability to transition to the wingback position later in their careers. This is due to their natural tendencies to play in wide areas and the positional awareness that they have gained through experience.
The inverted fullback is a role rather than a position. Their job is still to defend the flanks and provide support. However, a signature movement that they employ is moving centrally into the field and occupying a position in the midfield, alongside the deep lying midfielders. The role of an inverted fullback is to add to the midfield and assist with winning more midfield battles. This varies based on the attacking scenario.
Many teams utilize inverted fullbacks to get an edge over the opposition. However, it can be strongly argued that no teams have employed inverted fullbacks better than Bayern Munich and Manchester City. Both teams have deployed inverted fullbacks under the management of Pep Guardiola. At Bayern Munich, between and , Phillip Lahm and David Alaba were the first-choice fullbacks and fulfilled the inverted fullback role to great effect.
Both when in possession and out of possession, they would drift into the center of the pitch, alongside Xabi Alonso, the deep lying midfielder DLM. They would also prevent the oppositions attackers from pressing the DLM.
0コメント