Football Spice
The fullbacks' Dance
In the previous post, comments session. kamikaze kontiki asks:
How do you ask your wingbacks and centre-backs to react when one of the wingbacks is beaten?
"Here is what I have been told by a guy I played with. If the wingback is beaten and the attacker has a clear passage forward the CB has to move to cover him. Because by moving from the centre outwards to the flank, the CB both covers the angle on the cross and can push the winger away from the penalty box. The WB coming from behind on the other hand; has no chance of either preventing a cross or stopping the winger from cutting in. So, his best option is to move towards the penalty area to cover the CB's position.
Now this seems obvious to me but I see not just Barça but a lot of English teams who are supposedly more defensively disciplined not practicing this. This commonly happens at Barça with Dani Alves but he has greater pace so sometimes he manages to get back and make a second challenge. The clearest examples were when we used Sylvinho (eg. at the Vicente Calderon last season) who, when he was beaten used to move towards the centre but then discover that Puyol hadn't moved out to the flank to attack the man on the ball."
Now this seems obvious to me but I see not just Barça but a lot of English teams who are supposedly more defensively disciplined not practicing this. This commonly happens at Barça with Dani Alves but he has greater pace so sometimes he manages to get back and make a second challenge. The clearest examples were when we used Sylvinho (eg. at the Vicente Calderon last season) who, when he was beaten used to move towards the centre but then discover that Puyol hadn't moved out to the flank to attack the man on the ball."
I think the game against Almeria sparked this question. What you mentioned about the CB moving to cover the opponent player in possession at the flank is all true. That’s the traditional form. The reasons why it is not happening differs case by case, but the main factors involved are the following:
- It’s always a priority to secure numerical superiority in the heart of the defense (center) all the time. If the opponents have a forward running into the box then there is a need to have two defenders to check him, besides creating sufficient cover. The trick is that if the opponent is attacking your left flank, the center back moves out to check him while your right fullback moves to the center to act as a second CB. This way you defend against the player in possession on the flank, and at the same time you secure two players in the center.
- The increasing need of the fullbacks to contribute offense wise makes them both bomb forward sometimes at the same time. That leaves the Center backs with limited resources to invest on the flank under attack. They try to delay the defensive interception by securing the center till an additional player Fullback/Holding midfielder track back to offer more help. This sometimes comes too late. The movement of the opponent on the opposite flank may keep the fullback too busy to cut to the center. Even though –as I mentioned above- securing the box is the priority.
- The quality of the player attacking from the center plays a major role in making his teammate life much easier on the flank. It’s a simple trick: If you are a forward attacking the box with your teammate countering with the ball on the right flank, work on the right center back, prevent the right Center back from handing you to the left CB. As long as you can achieve that, the Right CB will not feel secured enough to open to the flank. You choose the right moment to surrender to the LCB releasing the RCB so he moves to the flank but only too late. Then you fake and change direction demanding the cross in the space.
- It doesn’t have to be a tactical defect all the time. It’s the defense quality (Communication, anticipation, and positioning) Vs the offense quality (Pace, skills, movement). Sometimes the counter attack is too fast for the defense to organize. Keep in mind that attacking spaces is always easier than covering spaces.
I am one of the most offense oriented coaches you can demand, but I start my offense plan by securing defense. I do NOT compromise when it come to the defense stability. Basically because offense efficiency is not dependent on the NUMBER of players you throw forward, but on how secure the players serving offense feel when they attack the opponent’s third. If your players move forward without keep looking backward they can do better offense. They will need to do fewer transitions which will save their energy for the job in hand rather than in travelling back and forth. What do I do to counter the Fullbacks issue depends on the resources in hand.
I like to have one offense oriented fullback (Alves like), one CB who can play as a holding midfielder as well (Pique like), and the other fullback to be capable of playing as a CB (Abidal like). And I guess you remember me demanding this structure since ever, which gladly happened last season(though we are still not as efficient in perfecting it).
The offense oriented fullback stretch the field from his flank, and a midfielder or a roaming forward stretch the field from the other flank to cover the lack of contribution of the defensive fullback. This way you open the field wide but still you have three players in the back acting as CB trio, with a holding midfielder in front. It will be an endless ramble to explain how the four players can beat any scheme they will face during the game through a systematic (trained) combination of movement-positioning-covering chains. This way you are secured defense wise and the rest of the team can move forward with ease. Six players with extremely offensive roles while team in possession can generate all the scoring opportunities needed to win, and create a show as well.
When the team loses Possession (and this is another defect in Barcelona’s system), players roles differ. There is a need for more positioning play without giving up high pressure. Usually only four of the players apply high pressure based on the position of the ball, the fifth and sixth will be unemployed in that specific period. Instead of marking players high in the offense field they need to withdraw and create a line with the holding midfielder to shield defense, cover the players applying pressure and delaying any counters. We are still not doing so.
I mentioned above that one of the Center backs has to be able to play as a holding midfielder. One of the defects of having three static center backs is that sometimes the opponents keep only one player in your area. Hiring three players to defend against one is a waste of resources. In that case, the CB with holding midfield qualities move forward to act as a holding midfielder pushing the team offense more to the opponents third. But aren’t we bouncing back to the two CB structures that caused the entire problem? No because unlike fullbacks the holding midfielder can move deeper toward your own area faster than the counter, because he is closer to the box than a fullback who is attacking the opponent’s flank. That will give your team more time to organize the moment the team lose possession so that when the opponent reach your own are, you will be ready with a well structured defense to break down their attack or delay it till your teammates make the transition.
But how possible is it to have an Alves, Abidal, and Pique in the same squad? Don’t bet on it. That’s why there are some other alternatives based on the player’s available.
If you have two offense oriented fullbacks and two center backs (and may be none of them is capable of playing as a holding mid), then you need to use two holding midfielders so that when the team set offense the two fullbacks attack the flanks and one of the two holding midfielders act as a third CB. The Center backs reacts to the holding midfielder movement like the umbrella. The holding midfielder is the ring you pull up and the more you pull it the more the Center backs open wide.
You may only have one holding midfielder and three center backs with two offense oriented fullbacks. Then I will directly switch to 3-3 structure with three center backs with my fullbacks acting as advanced wing backs on the sides of the holding midfielder.
And the assumptions never end… As it’s also important to analyze the team you play against as well.
My weekly column on Total Barca:
Barcelona 2010, better or worse
The unsung Heroes of Barcelona: Fullbacks
Barcelona’s injury woes; turning Crisis into Opportunities
Previous Articles on Football Mood:
Shopping tour, Cesc, Silva or Villa: Who will join Barcelona?
Advocatus Diaboli: Barcelona youth academy, Overrated.
Scoup Group: Our Football Mood News Agency
Barcelona 2010, Tactical Ramble.
Who score goals for Barcelona?
From Ronaldinho to Ibra, Txiki in number
kamikaze kontiki Said,
Thanks for the explanation, Ramzi.
A few questions and clarifications.
By numerical superiority do you mean that the defense has to outnumber the available strikers in the centre? Is it ok to do this at the cost of allowing the attacking winger (who has possession of the ball) to enter the penalty area?
This seems risky to me because considering this is a break and the penalty area is not crowded the winger has a lot of space available to get past 1 challenge and take a shot at goal. Or he could at the very least win a penalty (and I would note that when players are already moving at speed it much easier to go past a man or win a penalty while this would be much harder for say a static striker who first recieves a pass and then begins to move.)
Posted on March 10, 2010 at 5:51 AM
Ramzi Said,
Yes numerical superiority means that the defense has to outnumber the available strikers in the centre.
Is it ok to do this at the cost of allowing the attacking winger (who has possession of the ball) to enter the penalty area?
Hell No! And its good you asked so we clarify. I was talking specifically about player in possession while attacking on the flank (still hugging the line) Where it is the natural defensive territory of the fullback (the position we are discussing). The moment the player in possession is in the "cut in" stage, the nearest CB has to start open up (gradually) so he can meet the player in possession on the edge of the Area. The perfect spot for interception in this case is one or two meters outside the area because 1) the spaces shrink for the player in possession to knock past the defender, so he has to dribble, which is relatively more difficult. 2) If the defender positioned well for the interception in the path of the pass, the choice of passing the ball into the box declines (at least compared to open cross from the flank). This means we are in a fair one-on-one situation. 3) If the defender felt that he will not make it and the opponent will pass him he still can foul him OUTSIDE THE AREA and get a yellow card with pleasure.
The reason why it’s a must to delay the interception till the player in possession do the cut in rather than opening to the flank to do the interception there, is the opposite mix of the three mentioned above, beside what you noted in your comment:
"I would note that when players are already moving at speed it much easier to go past a man"
It’s safe to say that the offense can move with more speed on the flank than they can when they approach the area as there will be less space for pace. In fact that’s one of the reasons why when you are in 2 v2 situation even in the center, one of the players mark the advanced forward and the other try to create a cover rather than running toward the player in possession as long as there is still a safe distance from the box.
Another important reason for delaying the interception is that it gives more time for the defending team by not tempting the team in possession to make the last pass attempt. If a player runs with the ball on the flank, and one of the two defenders run toward him leaving one-on-one in the box, player in possession will have a zillion option: Knock pass defender and create a 2X1 situation by cutting into the box freely . The defender will be running after him which actually increase the possibility to get a penalty (Hint: if you are a forward running full pace to the box, the moment the defender gets behind you change your speed suddenly-slow down- and the next moment he will crush on you from behind earning you a penalty). The wing can even time his cross the moment the defender start opening to the flank and the striker fake and reposition in the box.
Delaying the interception a little gives more time for a teammate to track back. It’s a risky timed decision. Most of the times what’s obvious as a defender mistake could actually be a holding midfielder mistake or a fullback slow transition. The defender tries to delay, it doesn’t help and come back to haunt him.
Review Kazan goal against Barcelona A.K.A. Marquez flop ;)
Posted on March 10, 2010 at 7:09 AM
kamikaze kontiki Said,
Thanks Ramzi, you mentioned a few things I hadn't considered such as chosing the situation where you get the maximum possible cover even in the incident of the defender failing in a one-on-one with the attacking player.
Posted on March 10, 2010 at 7:38 AM
Waleed Said,
Ramzi, it seems like your old friend has agreed terms with Ivory Cost!
cheers
Posted on March 10, 2010 at 10:40 AM
Ramzi Said,
You are welcomed Kamikaze.
Not sure if it is official yet, Waleed. That will be a master strike.
Posted on March 10, 2010 at 11:07 AM
Bassam Said,
I hope Marcelo and our center backs are reading your blog :D
Posted on March 13, 2010 at 11:34 PM