Fullbacks moving into midfield: the many different interpretations

The concept of a full-back drifting into central midfield positions still seems relatively new.

Yet it is now more than a decade since Pep Guardiola started doing it at Bayern Munich, taking advantage of the fact that his full-backs were Philipp Lahm and David Alaba, two excellent technicians who both had experience playing in the engine room of the Bayern youth teams. .

Guardiola continued his plan at Manchester City – initially without success. Players like Pablo Zabaleta, Bacary Sagna and Gael Clichy struggled to get to grips with the position. Others have had more success. Oleksandr Zinchenko was a central midfielder who played almost permanently ‘out of position’ as a left back. Joao Cancelo felt more like a playmaker than a defender. Rico Lewis is perhaps the first player specifically prepared for this intermediate ‘half-back’ role: part defender, part midfielder.

At the moment it is not just common, but almost mandatory at top clubs. And with so many different players interpreting the role in so many different ways, perhaps it’s time to differentiate their uses more precisely.

1) One or two full-backs moving inside?

When Guardiola first unveiled his plan at Bayern Munich, his approach involved bringing both full-backs into midfield together. It was almost transformative, with these players being treated as part of the midfield structure, with the wingers being told to stay in the positions where they overlapping full-backs would have been more likely to sprint inside.

But in recent years it has become increasingly common to play some sort of hybrid system, partly because many managers – including Guardiola – prefer his defensive block to adopt a 3-2 structure rather than a 2-3 -structure.

So when Arsenal played Brighton earlier this season, Jurrien Timber pushed in to become a central midfielder, allowing Declan Rice to become a fifth striker, while Ben White reduced his position and became part of a back three. This is probably the most common version.

But Manchester United have often brought in both full-backs this season. In their defeat to Liverpool, for example, Diogo Dalot and Noussair Mazraoui both moved in at the same time, allowing two midfielders to push through.

2) Are they there to attack or defend?

Every player on the field obviously has responsibilities in both respects. But the original idea of ​​the halfback approach was to keep the back four close together, ready to act as a defensive unit if the opposition were to quickly counter-attack.

So for example, if Arsenal have used white to move the infield into midfield, you often think it’s mainly about the defensive shape. Here they are playing against a Brentford side with a two-front counter-attack, which is why Arsenal want a good defender in defence. that zone, instead of wide.

That is clearly not the thinking when Liverpool managers Jurgen Klopp and Arne Slot have moved Trent Alexander-Arnold onto the pitch. That’s a more proactive move, which involves getting the best passer on the ball more regularly, and in positions where he can make a wider variety of passes.

3) Do they act as a defensive midfielder or an attacking midfielder?

The general understanding is that if a full-back pushes the midfield into the midfield zone, he or she becomes a temporary player – most of the above screengrabs show that.

But in Manchester City’s 2-2 draw with Arsenal last week, Josko Gvardiol’s role was more advanced. He was instructed to move from left-back to City’s inside-left, with Rodri (and, when he left due to injury, Mateo Kovacic) as the only player in a 3-5-1-1. With City maintaining that form even after Arsenal were reduced to ten men, Gvardiol became a threat in the box and had some decent efforts on target.

Again, our instinct is to group the roles, as each full-back moving into midfield still feels like something new.

But if we distinguish between a defensive midfielder and an attacking midfielder in general – and of course we do – we must do the same with regard to these players.

4) Are they a ball player or a runner?

A more difficult one to define, as most roles will combine the two. But then again, you can say that for any position on the football field.

We can probably agree that Liverpool’s Alexander-Arnold and Destiny Udogie from Tottenham Hotspur are both being brought in for mainly attacking purposes. But while the idea is to get Alexander-Arnold on the ball, because he can play the final pass so effectively, like his assist for Luis Diaz this weekend…

…Udogie feels more like a “willing runner”, helping to move opponents away from the flank, allowing Son Heung-min – Spurs’ main forward – to receive passes and find more space on the side. Udogie is obviously decent enough in possession and can make good forward passes, but he is not a playmaker in the Alexander-Arnold manner.

5) Natural or vice versa?

The tendency to call these players ‘inverted’ full-backs doesn’t really make sense; the idea of ​​inverted wingers is that they line up on the opposite side of their strong foot, and cut inside and use their stronger foot to shoot. Alexander-Arnold, who plays from a narrower position on the right, isn’t exactly blown away when he makes such passes.

But Cancelo, when he played as a left back for Manchester City, was a different case. Although he had a penchant for using the outside of his right foot, when hitting these types of crosses towards the far post he essentially behaved as an inverted winger would.

There are of course further complications depending on the different formations and responsibilities, with and without the ball. Guardiola has also increasingly switched to using a centre-back, rather than a wing-back, moving into midfield.

But this position has become so common that it is no longer a variation on a role, as we previously thought of it – but a role in itself, with its own variations.