My good friend Matt Pavlich has been doing a nightly email with a soccer thing to watch, to read, and to listen to. It’s been a wonderful comfort lately. Last night, his article to read was this column by Jonathan Wilson in The Guardian: Football’s rare pause for thought gives coaches time for inspiration.
I think (hope) Wilson is right, that we will see some wild, fun stuff when soccer resumes. Thinking about what’s next in the soccer world is one of my favorite things to do, and I generally think that teams are too conservative (though for obvious, understandable reasons).
So, here on this blog that has no rules or purpose, we are going to spend a few days pondering the future. What new innovations could we see when the game returns to the field? First up…
Inverted outside backs and center backs.
For as long as I can remember, right-footed players have played on the right side of the defense and left-footed players have played on the left side of defense. The only time it didn’t stand true is if a team didn’t have a player of a certain foot, usually with a team failing to field a left-footed player. Jamie Carragher remains one of my favorite left backs of all time.
Why is that? Why do teams prefer to play a right-footed player on the right and a left-footed player on the left?
The conversation about center backs is different from the one about outside backs, so let’s split it up.
Center backs:
Louis van Gaal and Pep Guardiola have each gone out of their way to get center backs onto their “natural” side. Pep said in 2018, "It’s so important to have a left-[footed] central defender.” I’ve never seen either coach really elaborate on it, but here are three quotes that shine some light:
Guardiola: “[Laporte] is a left-footed player. He helped us to make our build-up and when the ball comes from the right, he immediately controls to the left and plays it to Leroy - that is quicker than we would play with a right-footer in that position.”
Also… “His left foot and many actions to build up to make it quicker and better – we don’t have it, not because the other ones are not good but he has the only left foot as a central defender and for the way we want to play that is so important.”
Louis van Gaal, spoken by Phil Neville: “I remember Louis van Gaal talking about playing a left-footed center back. If you have a left-footed center back it helps with coming out on the left-hand side. If you have a right-footed one on the left of the pair, the movement isn’t as quick or as smooth.”
To take those ideas another layer down (to a place that it makes sense to my brain), putting defenders on their “natural sides” helps to:
Make the field as big as possible. When the ball swings from side to side, you always want a player to take the ball with his front foot to keep the options open and the field big, so you want the front foot to be the strong foot. If you have the strong foot on the outside, it opens up the full width of the field.
Move the ball from side to side as quickly as possible.
I find Guardiola’s thoughts to be both insightful and contradictory. A core fundamental of Guardiola is keeping the field as big as possible in possession. At the same time, nobody plays through his center midfielders as much as Guardiola. While the passing angles and efficiency to the wide areas would be better with the “natural sides” option, the angles toward the middle would get cut off. If you think about it, a left-footed player on the left only ‘opens’ his body to about 30% of the field (since he or she is usually in between the sideline and the middle of the field in possession), whereas a right-footed player on the left opens his body on his strong foot to about 70% of the field.
Why A more than B, then? I’d guess it’s because the ability to play to the wide channel opens up the middle, and you can’t play through the middle unless you have the threat to play wide; B doesn’t matter unless you have A. That makes sense to me
Here’s what I think has changed recently, though, and why an evolution might be coming. More teams are pressing and/or defending outside-in. The traditional pressing sequence was either straight on or inside-out, as the diagram shows:
You can see the value of having a left-footed player on the left side.
Now, however, we see outside-in movements more and more (thanks to Liverpool’s success with it under Jurgen Klopp):
In this scenario, you can see that it would be better to be right-footed on the left side. Having your stronger foot on the inside allows you to play away from pressure or dribble into the open space out of pressure. I would also add that the value of having more angles toward the center midfielders is an undervalued advantage of playing players on their ‘opposite’ sides.
As teams continue to press outside-in more often - and I don’t see any reason or likelihood that they wouldn’t - we should also see teams use inverted center backs more often.
Outside Backs:
This one is more simple, I think. You want outside backs on their natural side because it allows them to carry the ball forward and puts them on the stronger foot for a cross. Three years ago I would have called that stupid and outdated (and lots of other mean things). Crossing has always been a crutch and overused. Crossing has changed in recent years, though.
Instead of whipping the ball as hard as you can into the box, there are more coherent ideas. Specifically, the early bended ball behind a defense has been particularly useful. If your outside back receives the ball in space out wide and the opponent has a high line, the outside back should absolutely hit the bending ball into the depth. Those balls are deadly and awesome and I don’t see how you can replace them.
At the same time, outside backs are spending less time than ever in the wide channels. Wingers have moved back out wide and outside backs have been asked to occupy more central channels. Outside backs now need to connect with center midfielders and the striker through the middle. Again, we return to the passing angles from each foot; the inside foot should have more options through more dangerous areas.
To take it another step further, outside backs are usually the spare man, the wildcard that opposition defenses struggle to account for as they arrive late. Teams have found ways to make outside backs their most dangerous players. Thus far, though, it has always been in the wide areas. What’s stopping teams from using that advantage down the middle? Just as wingers became inverted a decade ago so they could be on their strong foot as they go inside, why wouldn’t we do the same thing with outside backs?
TL/DR summary: I’d be surprised if teams didn’t start using more inverted center backs and outside backs… partially because it’s weird that it hasn’t been done more to this point, and partially because it seems to suit the way the game is evolving.
That’s all today. Carry on (inside please).