2 Questions for our more senior supporters

[dannyboi-ffc]

As some of you will have seen, I'm posting the top 10 per position everyday. I've come to midfield and wide players. But establishing positions from the old positions no longer used is baffling me.

Super Mitch has helped clear up What a half back. I always thought a half back was a winger but the closest comparison is a defensive midfielder. Then I look at Johnny Haynes and he is classed as a forward. But he wasn't a striker in relation to a Ivor or a Saha. I would class him more as a Murphy.

I guess what I'm asking is, do players like Charlie Mitten and Arthur Stevens fall into the Boa Morte (wide man category) or the same as Johnny Haynes even though they were different positions at the time. Leggatt was a fwd but I would put him in the wide man selections.

Need your knowledge to clarify this

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[win-dup]

Yes Mitten and Stevens would be classed as wide men as would Leggat. Stevens and Leggatt also made wonderful centre forwards when necessary but Mitten never played that position.
Just typing those three names has bought a lump to my throat as I think back to those wonderful days at the Cottage, in what seemed to be a simpler time.

[dannyboi-ffc]

Wikipedia isn't the best thing to go by but I sometimes use it to double check my own knowledge. I knew both Mitten and Stevens were wide men but according to wiki if you type in fulham players, they were both half backs. Which I've been told is closest compared to a modern day defensive midfielder. 

[dannyboi-ffc]

......That's where my confusion came from.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[Peabody]

Danny to try and help, there was the goalie, then two full backs, right and left, generally numbere 2 & 3. Then came the half back line, right half, centre half and left half, numbered 4, 5 & 6, of which either 4 or 6 were defensive and attacking, the centre half was defensive. Then you had the forward line, outside right, inside right, centre forward, inside left and outside left, numbered 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11. The inside forwards generally adopted a defensive and attacking position, therefore Johnny Haynes was more of an attacker than defender.

Hope this helps

[RaySmith]

Yes, a wing-half-no.s 4 and 6, which I was myself, was a defensive minded midfielder, like Alan Mullery and  Eddie Lowe, who I think also played centre -half at times, as opposed to an inside forward- no. 8 and 10, who was a more creative, attacking midfielder- like Johnny Haynes.

Mitten and Steven were before my time, but Leggat was a winger -7, but also played as a centre forward, as wind-up says.

[dannyboi-ffc]

Cheers guys. If I had to draw the formation I would know straight away. And I understood what an inside forward was. My problem is I never saw that era so it's difficult to know which position to compare with. I didn't know if an inside forward was an attacking midfielder or a striker.

This has helped

[filham]

You have a problem Danny, it was an entirely different philosophy and you may well need a mind transplant to fully understand it.

Football was more attack minded and based on players doing particular jobs that required their own special skills to be employed in particular areas of the field,

Players were not expected to cover acres of ground and exhaust themselves after 60 minutes or so but to do a good job in their own position.

Haynes was a forward but played deep behind outright wingers , a centre forward and an inside right. He would be employed today just behind the main strikers

[Peabody]

I always considered Alan Mullery as an attacking midfielder, whilst Eddie Lowe at 6 was a defender. Tosh was an out and out left winger

[F(f)CUK]

Basically with the old 2, 3 ,5 formation just imagine primary school pupils playing football with the teacher shouting out "stop bunching!!!!".

[grandad]

In the early 50´s when I started supporting the player positions were clearly defined.
There was the GK of course. Numbered 1
There were left & right fullbacks numbered 2 & 3 who rarely ventured past the half way line.
There was one centre half numbered 5 who dealt with crosses & was more of a sweeper.
There were left & right wing halves numbered 4 & 6. One was generally defensive & the other more attacking.
There was a true right winger numbered 7 , an inside right numbered 8, a centre forward numbered 9, an inside left numbered 10 & a true left winger numbered 11.

Our number 10 , Haynes commanded the centre circle from where he sent long balls to either winger or through balls to the number 8 or 9. The wingers hardly came inside nor played on the "wrong" side. Their job was to advance to the bye line & send in crosses for the 8 & 9.
At attacking corners 8 & 9 were in the box with the 10 & attacking half back on the edge of the area.

At set pieces there were rarely long shots for goal as the ball & footwear were far different from now.

All in all, every player knew where he should be & what he had to do.

The game today is over complicated. Football is the easiest game in the world to play. Any group of youngsters can play with a ball & piles of clothes as goal posts.

It wasn´t until the mid 60´s when Alf Ramsey created his wingerless teams that the game changed. For the better? I am not sure.

[Barrett487]

Just a suggestion Danny.... How about our 10 'most creative' players?

(and i don't mean arts & crafts)

[GorgeousGus]

Arthur Stevens was a very direct out and out winger who would have won a bagful of England caps if he had played in a slightly different era to Stanley Matthews

[Jamie88]

What I struggle to understand about this old formation, is that surely a defensive line of effectively 2 or 3 men would endlessly struggle against a forward line of 5?!

Was there ever any slight changes in formations back in the early days?

[dannyboi-ffc]

What I struggle to understand about this old formation, is that surely a defensive line of effectively 2 or 3 men would endlessly struggle against a forward line of 5?!

Was there ever any slight changes in formations back in the early days?

That's a great question. I've always wondered similar. Was they as tactically aware as they are nowadays? .........well except for Fulham managers anyway

[grandad]

I don´t remember any of the 5 attacking players having defensive duties. The 2 full backs, centre half & the 2 half backs were a match for the opposing 5 forwards. The only player who generally had a dual role was one of the half backs such as Mullery or Robson. Perhaps this was the start of the box to box player.

[Jamie88]

I don´t remember any of the 5 attacking players having defensive duties. The 2 full backs, centre half & the 2 half backs were a match for the opposing 5 forwards. The only player who generally had a dual role was one of the half backs such as Mullery or Robson. Perhaps this was the start of the box to box player.

So did the centre half and one of the half backs almost act as what we would consider the two centre backs today? And the other half back a kind of defensive midfielder until they gained possession with which he turned into an attacking midfielder?

Also, if there was a 5 on 5 situation and if the attacking players had no defensive duties whatsoever, then it must have made it hard to link the defence to the forwards and build a counter attack without lumping it upfield?

[Kent Cassandra]

Also, if there was a 5 on 5 situation and if the attacking players had no defensive duties whatsoever, then it must have made it hard to link the defence to the forwards and build a counter attack without lumping it upfield?

This is where the Maestro came into his own there was no lumping it upfield but pinpoint passes.