Inverted wingers

[Jim©]

The half time sub of Willian got me thinking on Saturday about how much I dislike inverted wingers.
Willian of course is predominantly right footed, playing on the left, and is a bit of a one off. Even though defenders know he'll cut inside for crosses or shots, he's hard to stop.
However, Wilson was a really good example of playing an orthodox winger and him still being dangerous. A couple of first time shots went really close on his favoured left foot. Iwobi had a couple of outstanding games on the right wing, with his stronger right foot too (wolves, Forest and W Ham).
Another thing is that as a defender, the ball being played in from the dead ball line, so turning you to face your own goal, is difficult. Much easier to face away from the goal and wait for the inverted winger to put the ball in from further out.

So, why are they so key- i get the point about opening the channels up for the full backs to bomb into, it works brilliantly with Willian and Robinson (though I wouldn't let him take throw ins for a while)?

[Jims Dentist]

The half time sub of Willian got me thinking on Saturday about how much I dislike inverted wingers.
Willian of course is predominantly right footed, playing on the left, and is a bit of a one off. Even though defenders know he'll cut inside for crosses or shots, he's hard to stop.
However, Wilson was a really good example of playing an orthodox winger and him still being dangerous. A couple of first time shots went really close on his favoured left foot. Iwobi had a couple of outstanding games on the right wing, with his stronger right foot too (wolves, Forest and W Ham).
Another thing is that as a defender, the ball being played in from the dead ball line, so turning you to face your own goal, is difficult. Much easier to face away from the goal and wait for the inverted winger to put the ball in from further out.

So, why are they so key- i get the point about opening the channels up for the full backs to bomb into, it works brilliantly with Willian and Robinson (though I wouldn't let him take throw ins for a while)?

Been thinking this for a long time Jim.
It makes us too predictable.

[ffc73]

I know he is a full back but, Robinson running down the line and whipping the ball in for Muniz to score on Saturday was delightful to watch.  Wonderful old fashioned wing play. 

Not the constant, attack, stop, check back, stop, wait for all the defenders to be in position, pass back to our CBs.

Either works, of course.  Willan cross to Muniz v Bournemouth but the key in both instances was speed.  We are often pedestrian.

[btffc]

It's fairly important to Marco's tactical approach. The wide interplay between the fullback and winger in attacking areas is key and he likes to have the fullback and winger to be opposite footed so you have both the threat of the winger coming inside on their stronger foot and the fullback going to the endline to send in a cross. When both are same footed then they are both going to favor getting to the endline. That's part of the reason the left side has worked so well for us and the right side has just been pumping in crosses. Now Willian's quality on the left absolutely makes a big difference but there are also just so many more options when you can attack in different ways.

[filham]

Willian's and Cairney's skills combined with Robinson's pace makes that left wing triangle our best attacking feature, it should not be disturbed in any way.

The popularity of inside out wide man is probably due to the fact that the old fashioned winger with the pace and trickery to beat the full back on the outside has long gone.

Oh to be able to see players like Mathews, Finney, Tosh and Liddel again.

[btffc]

The popularity of inside out wide man is probably due to the fact that the old fashioned winger with the pace and trickery to beat the full back on the outside has long gone.

I think it is most to do with evolution of tactics. The 4-2-3-1 came into dominance in the 2000's because it could outnumber and dominate the midfield against the 4-4-2 creating a 3v2 in central midfield. The 4-3-3 is a close cousin of the 4-2-3-1 retaining the same 3 man midfield principles just deployed slightly differently. However, it also necessitated a single striker so you lost some goalscoring ability as a result. Additionally, running to the endline and pumping in crosses lost value as a single striker was less effective than 2 strikers at converting crosses. So to increase goal scoring ability while keeping the dominant midfield intact, inverted wingers became popular since them being able to cut inside on their stringer foot to shoot helped make up for the loss of the second striker.

[sarnian]

Man City play with inverted wingers and have been quite successful in the last few seasons.  

[Karlos]

I think its all to do with defending teams being told to always show the player inside to where you have other players to support you, therefore being shown inside on your stronger foot is a shooting opportunity.

I used to be a centre back and would always show outside as it was away from goal, was only when I was professionally coached was told different and it never and still doesn't make sense to me as the goal is the immediate danger, not the corner flag

[The Rational Fan]

It's fairly simple, why we have inverted wingers, because if a winger can cross with both feet but can only shot well with one foot, then he has to play as an inverted winger.

Many wingers find it easier to cross with their bad foot than shot with their bad foot. Reality is that typically practice improves a players crossing more than it improves their shooting.

In a front three, you cannot have a midfield winger like David Beckham that doesn't shot well with his left foot. If David Beckham was playing today in a team with a front three he would either have to learn to a) shot with his left (to be a right winger) or b) cross with his left (to be a left winger) or c) move into either central midfield or right back.

In the past, a player that can only use one foot well could be a wide midfielder (sometimes called a winger), such a player cannot play a wide forward (also sometimes called winger), as it is a completely different position. As an example, a player like Harry Wilson is a left midfield winger in a 442 and right forward winger in a 433.

As an example of how wingers didn't need to score in the past. In Man United's Triple Season 98/99, Ryan Giggs made a huge contribution, yet it is hardly ever mentioned that he only contributed four goals in the entire season.

[bencher]

In addition to tactics, it's also the players that emerged through those tactics in the last 15 years that made inverted wingers the most dangerous players on the pitch - Arjen Robben, C Ronaldo, Messi, Salah, Mbappe etc.

[Jim©]

It's fairly simple, why we have inverted wingers, because if a winger can cross with both feet but can only shot well with one foot, then he has to play as an inverted winger.

Many wingers find it easier to cross with their bad foot than shot with their bad foot. Reality is that typically practice improves a players crossing more than it improves their shooting.

Wasn't Willian's stunning goal last season v Forest with his 'weaker' foot? Surely that dispells your argument a bit? I always thought it was for the inverted winger to move inside, pulling the opposition full back with them, thus making a free space for our full back to get into.

[filham]

Hard to look back and think of Tosh, Charlie Mitten, Barret or Boa  playing as an inverted winger. I guess our best early inverted winger was Duffy.

[Snibbo]

It's this type of intelligent, informed discussion that makes this forum worthwhile 

[The Rational Fan]

It's fairly simple, why we have inverted wingers, because if a winger can cross with both feet but can only shot well with one foot, then he has to play as an inverted winger.

Many wingers find it easier to cross with their bad foot than shot with their bad foot. Reality is that typically practice improves a players crossing more than it improves their shooting.

Wasn't Willian's stunning goal last season v Forest with his 'weaker' foot? Surely that dispells your argument a bit? I always thought it was for the inverted winger to move inside, pulling the opposition full back with them, thus making a free space for our full back to get into.

Willian's stunning goal only proves that he score with left foot and using my logic that he would make a good right winger. But he also crosses very well with his left foot so he does make a good left winger too.

If you can shot and cross with both feet equally well, then even the word inverted is a bit odd. As an example, if a player (like Willian) is good enough to play left footed on the left wing is he even inverted or playing left footed.

Every winger can cut inside to open up space for the full back, as every winger can use both feet with some being better at it than others.

The logic of inverted winger is that he is better cutting inside and more likely to score doing so than a regular winger, which also means he is more likely to open up space as opposition players try to close him down.

[Carborundum]

Good discussion this.  Scoring a goal from open play is and rightly should be, hard.  Athleticism and organisation of defences has improved significantly and the pitch and goal isn't any bigger.  What to do?  Whatever you do it will need to be done quickly and unpredictably.  Willian/Robinson/Cairney works because all the options are available with Robinson the byline option.  Making Willian an inverted winger. Two footedness always helps, but speed of thought and movement, understanding with teammates is the special sauce.  Iwobi/Pereira/Castagne was shaping up nicely pre AFCON.  Iwobi's right footed making him a classic winger, but really it was about his chemistry with Pereira and his intelligent movement.  At least to these eyes.