Fullbacks: An evolution
Fullbacks. Entrenched in football philosophy, the fullback position is widely regarded as one of the most important positions on the pitch. And yet, they are rather disregarded in the everyman talk in discussion regarding tactical outfits. While the waxing and waning of tactical trends is periodical, the evolution of these trends may rise above what is regarded as “tactical innovation” and thus, turn from a distinctive feature into a staple of football.
Widely regarded as the first “proper formation” used in football, the WM was popularised by one Herbert Chapman in the 1930s as manager of Arsenal. The WM soon became the basis of all modern football formational innovation. The pyramid shape (2–3–5) came from the exploitation of the offside rule, where the Football Association dictated that only 2 players were required to keep the attacking team onside.
So you might be wondering where the phrase “fullback” came from. Well, simply put, the fullbacks were the 2 players who were tasked to be the furthest “back” in the defensive phase of play. While during the early 20th century, the naming convention was aptly bestowed upon said players, the original “fullback” is what we now call the centre back.
With this, the fullbacks were pushed out towards the by-line and, with the prominence of the 4–4–2 system became widely used out wide excuse the pun, now running parallel with one another to provide structural balance in teams’ tactical setups. No longer was it simple to bypass the midfield in a route-one situation, the 4–4–2 created banks of space which were much more easily covered by the defensive line. The increasing defensive duties conferred to these players along the exteriors of the setup quickly gave way to the belittling moniker of “where the failed wingers go.” As the rhetoric was spread across channels of football commentary, the relative importance given to fullbacks in contributing to a team’s success deteriorated, in the professional sense, whereby, coaches and managers alike would largely disregard fullbacks in feeble attempts to extract the pre-conceived minimal value in their contribution. This mindset was helped on by the media as well as the fans’ perception of the position.
Gradual progression of tactical evolution has slowly led to the fullback in being one of the most important assets to an outfit. With the understanding and use of space being of such emphasis in the modern era, the particular area along the exterior boundaries is now used as an exploitative measure when a team is both in and out of possession. This provides us, therefore, validity in using fullbacks as offensive instruments. Herein lies the shift in mentality regarding the role of fullback.
Then came one Johan Cruyff. A forefather of football philosophy, he gave us the innovation of total football and showed the world that fluidity in tactical setups paired with adaptability and compromise was a highly effective way in keeping possession.
You see, Johan Cruyff understood the key to winning in football like no other. He understood that without possession, it was next to impossible to win a match of football. And he understood this to its fullest extent. The value of possession was infinite. In doing so, the tactical development of total football gave way to the understanding of positionality on the pitch. When you combine this with the ever-rising number of fullbacks having such a high degree in dribbling and ball progression at feet, the locational advancement of their position is only natural.
Further up the pitch now, the fullback was employed to fulfil the (at large) most pure for of the total football principle in their tactical role. They were to assist in first keeping the ball, as well as advancing the ball into the midfield. Exploiting the idea of positionality, the elite minds of football realised that while it was all well and good to have possession, the need to keep it was lacking in the natural tendencies of their tactics. To counteract this, there was a must for numerical superiority was instilled in their philosophy. And the simplest way was to create an overload on one side of the pitch with exaggerated imbalance of shape. This meant sending the players who were exclusively played wide — the wingers — inwards, towards the midfield, giving rise to inverted wingers, especially during the transition between the defensive and offensive phase.
Now remember the use of space being one of the most important factors in the modern age of the game? This is what allowed fullbacks to push up even more, partaking in overlapping runs and by now, the evolution of the position is where it is today. Where while being defensive in theory, the nature of the fullback has also taken on offensive duties in practice. Only recently, with the popularisation of the gegenpress, as the attacking players on a team is now further up the pitch as to “press from the front,” fullbacks have also been used in bypassing phases of play, tasked now also to direct long balls from relatively deeper positions.
A pillar of the beautiful game, the evolution of the fullback from being widely undervalued and defensive minded to one key to the offensive mindset deployed by a manager, their evolution has certainly been one that has gained it’s role, arguably the greatest comparative importance in determining the way in which a team approaches a match.
__________
Hope you enjoyed this post!
If you did, all I ask is for is:
- A follow if you love the beautiful game as much as myself
- A share so I can expand my reach and audience
- Some applause if you so please
Much appreciated,
Ning Choi
