Inverted wingers, wrong footed

Rossa

Full Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
11,231
Location
Looking over my shoulder.
Modern football seems to prefer inverted wingers who are wrong footed for their position, meaning left footed players play on the right and right footed players play on the left. Statistically, do you get better numbers with this approach? I'm thinking assists and goals. Also, those of you who can use both feet fairly well (my left foot is for running and standing on), is it easier to cross or shoot with your weak foot?

I'm asking this because I genuinely believe that having wingers who can run the channels and whip in an early cross is more entertaining to watch than inverted wingers who are sometimes a little too predictable.
 
Barca have that setup. Barca win everything.
 
Gol123 said:
Barca have that setup. Barca win everything.
Click to expand...

Everyone must play like Barca? Obviously, if you have world class players anything works. If you try to take them by playing their game you are bound to lose. There are few teams today who play with right footed players on the wings, but I recall Lucas Moura giving Alba all kinds of trouble because of dribbling and sheer speed. Giggs used to do that for fun - just run past your defender if you are faster - it really does work, and then you can mix it up and go inside when the opportunity bids itself. The majority of inverted wingers seem incapable of crossing with their wrong foot.
 
Rossa said:
Modern football seems to prefer inverted wingers who are wrong footed for their position, meaning left footed players play on the right and right footed players play on the left. Statistically, do you get better numbers with this approach? I'm thinking assists and goals. Also, those of you who can use both feet fairly well (my left foot is for running and standing on), is it easier to cross or shoot with your weak foot?

I'm asking this because I genuinely believe that having wingers who can run the channels and whip in an early cross is more entertaining to watch than inverted wingers who are sometimes a little too predictable.
Click to expand...
it is easier to cross with the weak foot.
 
I'm with you Rossa. The ideal winger for me is a more consistent version of Nani (on the right) at his best. Tricky, quick, can cross well with his main foot but is a goal threat when cutting inside on his other foot.
 
Rossa said:
Everyone must play like Barca? Obviously, if you have world class players anything works. If you try to take them by playing their game you are bound to lose. There are few teams today who play with right footed players on the wings, but I recall Lucas Moura giving Alba all kinds of trouble because of dribbling and sheer speed. Giggs used to do that for fun - just run past your defender if you are faster - it really does work, and then you can mix it up and go inside when the opportunity bids itself. The majority of inverted wingers seem incapable of crossing with their wrong foot.
Click to expand...
Barcelona having inverted wingers allows their fullbacks to push up and create width. Means there are more forwards runs to pick out and makes it harder to pick up players.
 
Rossa said:
Modern football seems to prefer inverted wingers who are wrong footed for their position, meaning left footed players play on the right and right footed players play on the left. Statistically, do you get better numbers with this approach? I'm thinking assists and goals. Also, those of you who can use both feet fairly well (my left foot is for running and standing on), is it easier to cross or shoot with your weak foot?

I'm asking this because I genuinely believe that having wingers who can run the channels and whip in an early cross is more entertaining to watch than inverted wingers who are sometimes a little too predictable.
Click to expand...
Wingers who whip in crosses can be equally predictable. At the of the end of the day the player's intelligence will make him predictable or not.
 
Have that set up means you rely on your full backs to provide all the width. Our full backs can't do that and is a major problem. Especially when Young aside our wide players seem incapable of doing much on on the outside. Of course even when he was fit we refused to play Young in his best position anyway.
 
Inverted wingers > classic wingers. Cutting inside allows for more creativity IMO.
 
kouroux said:
Wingers who whip in crosses can be equally predictable. At the of the end of the day the player's intelligence will make him predictable or not.
Click to expand...

Exactly, I mean Valencia is the most one dimensional winger I have ever seen yet there was a period of time where most fullbacks couldn't cope with him even thought you knew exactly what he was going to do every time.
 
Depends how you like your setup and team to play.

I favour wide forwards so inverted wingers are my preferred option.

That said, with a target man, the style of cross that is easier to deal with offensively naturally comes from regular wingers that cross convexly as opposed to concavely.
 
Devil may care said:
Exactly, I mean Valencia is the most one dimensional winger I have ever seen yet there was a period of time where most fullbacks couldn't cope with him even thought you knew exactly what he was going to do every time.
Click to expand...
I always why footballers aren't more ambidextrous, it would confuse so much the full backs when facing players capable of going both sides of them.
 
Just be two footed, then you have the option of cutting in or going down the outside.

If football training is your 9 to 5, there's no excuse to be one footed. The amount of hopelessly one footed players playing at the very top level is ridiculous. Practice, repetition, strength. It's not hard if you put the work in. I was hopelessly one footed when I was in my teens, which was no good for playing in goal, as I needed to be able to pass and clear the ball on both sides. My left footed clearances were embarrassing. Worked on it for months just by smashing a ball against the sports hall walls on the school field, became comfortable using it pretty quickly. Worked on power first, then the accuracy came with repetition.

Played a a game of sevens a couple of years ago whilst carrying a bit of a toe injury on my right foot. Played completely with my left foot. Scored two, one was a screamer. If I can do it, the pros can too.

Chris Waddle agrees:
You played on both flanks and could cross and shoot with both feet. Why are so few of England’s top players now as adaptable?
Tim Glenning, Haslemere

"I was completely left-footed until I was about 23. It’s then that I started playing on the right-hand side and people knew I’d cut onto my left so I worked on my right in the gym. Twenty minutes a day for a couple of months is all it takes for a professional improve his weaker foot. It makes me laugh that England are crying out for a left-footed player and the guys trying to get that role can’t just practice for 20 minutes a day on their left."
Click to expand...
 
If you are a professional footballer playing everyday and getting paid a fortune, the least you can do is learn to play with your weaker foot. I'm two footed, I was left footed but kept practising with my right until I could do most things to a decent standard - passing and shooting on my weaker foot is fine, long passes and crosses are pretty wayward though, the entire body has to move the opposite direction to which I am used to - I could probably work it out if I was my job!

Nothing stopping an inverted winger putting in an early cross, curl one to the far post, it's got the right swing to get in behind the defenders and no keeper can come claim it, something you can't do on the other wing. You don't have to cut inside and shoot. The main thing for an inverted winger is diagonal runs without the ball, it's hard to defend because the fullback has to come inside on his weaker foot and track/tackle or the nearest CB has to move towards you and leave a gap with his partner.
 
Physiocrat said:
I'm with you Rossa. The ideal winger for me is a more consistent version of Nani (on the right) at his best. Tricky, quick, can cross well with his main foot but is a goal threat when cutting inside on his other foot.
Click to expand...

Agreed. For me, that is the ideal winger as well. Obviously, with regular wingers, fullbacks were important attacking outlets. Neville charged up the pitch when Beckham played for instance.
 
Meh. I'm not a fan of crossing football so I want my winger to do everything. I'd rather watch Robben at his peak to Valencia at his peak.
 
Makes me wonder when this trend first started and who was the first prominent inverted winger/wing-forward. Most of the older goalscoring wing-forwards such as Rummenigge, Lato, Jairzinho, Rep, and Blokhin used to play on the side of their preferred foot. If they were to break through today, they would probably have been playing as an inverted wing-forward.
 
It has a lot to do with modern tactics. Modern lineups have only 1 striker, that's half as many bodies in the box than with a 442 (even less with the older 235). Today's defenders are also extremely good at defending high balls, statistics show that crosses are not a very effective way of attacking.

The width and wide crossing that wingers used to provide can also come from full backs. Most top teams have quality attacking full backs and associating them with inverted wingers makes it less redundant.
 
PedroMendez said:
it is easier to cross with the weak foot.
Click to expand...
Are you saying it's easier to cross the ball with your weak foot over your strong foot? Or that it's easier to cross with your weak foot that in is to shoot with your weak foot?

If it's the latter then yeah I'm with you, if it's the former then please do explain.....
 
Last edited:
PedroMendez said:
it is easier to cross with the weak foot.
Click to expand...

I always found it easier to shoot with my weaker foot that to cross. So long as you can get some decent power on the shot it should trouble the keeper but for crossing you have to be far more precise to pick out a man.
 
LennonNL said:
Are you saying it's easier to cross the ball with your weak food over your strong foot? Or that it's easier to cross with your week foot that in is to shoot with your weak foot?

If it's the latter then yeah I'm with you, if it's the former then please do explain.....
Click to expand...

The latter.
I can´t shoot with my weak foot at all. Not enough strength/power.
 
You're never going to be as efficient on your weak foot as you are on your strong one unless you stop training with your strong foot entirely. When we are put on the spot we will always revert to type and take the safe option so there will always be a degree of predictability.
 
Surely comes down to better defending of crosses too. Almost every team is excellent at positioning and strategy for dealing with crosses these days. Seriously rare to see a back 4 who are able to get setup concede from a cross.

That and the fact no teams play 2 up top anymore.
 
PedroMendez said:
The latter.
I can´t shoot with my weak foot at all. Not enough strength/power.
Click to expand...
Yeah same. I can pass it well with my left and maybe cross it but still can't get enough power on for it to be anything other than a loft!
 
I remember when I was a kid we used to have contests in shooting with both feet maybe is the reason why in Portugal our wingers shoot with both feet (besides quaresma, futre, ...)
 
It all comes back to control of the midfield. The increasing priority afforded to ball retention means that phases of attacking play are different than what they were 20 years ago. The direct style where possession was turned over every few seconds is mostly gone. Instead, teams can move up the park en masse and that offers better opportunities for the full-backs to overlap - whereas previously the ball might be turned over by the time they'd moved into the attacking third. And, as a result, conventional wingers aren't required to occupy the wide channels, as these can be covered by the full-back. At the same time, as @BBRBB states, control of the midfield means there is usually only one striker and, again, it makes sense for additional support to be provided by the 'inverted winger' or more traditionally speaking the inside-left/right. And the best way to maximise their goal threat is to have them cutting onto their stronger foot, again from genuine shooting positions rather than away from goal.
 
Rossa said:
Modern football seems to prefer inverted wingers who are wrong footed for their position, meaning left footed players play on the right and right footed players play on the left. Statistically, do you get better numbers with this approach? I'm thinking assists and goals. Also, those of you who can use both feet fairly well (my left foot is for running and standing on), is it easier to cross or shoot with your weak foot?

I'm asking this because I genuinely believe that having wingers who can run the channels and whip in an early cross is more entertaining to watch than inverted wingers who are sometimes a little too predictable.
Click to expand...
wingers in a 442 (or variant there of) who go outside their man and have a couple of strikers to pick out plus possibly the other winger who has drifted in and / or a midfielder breaking into the box have a very different role from wide players in a 433 type formation - especially when the central striker in said 433 drifts deep / wide to pick the ball up as well - horses for courses but if your playing on the counter then quick wingers attacking space seems more sensible than if your playing a more possession based game.
Just play whatever system best suits your players and dare I say it the managers philosophy
 
VorZakone said:
Inverted wingers > classic wingers. Cutting inside allows for more creativity IMO.
Click to expand...

Not if all the player ever does is cut inside and there is a lack of variation (Depay)
TBH when it comes to wingers the very best ones usually can use both feet competently (not that they are two footed) so it doesn't matter if they are inverted or not.
 
Is it easy to use your weak foot?

Yes it is, most players are lazy and prefer to play Fifa than take a ball a play against a wall, I'm not kidding, the first step if your foot is really weak is only to take a ball and repeat the sequence pass-control, and a wall is the best partner for that.

Why use inverted wingers?

Because they are not wingers but inside forwards. Inside forwards are better than wingers in formations that uses only one striker because they can come from the second post and still keep a great shot or pass angle, a left footed on the left has less options than a right footed on the left particularly when the right footed can use his left foot, even if it's only a limited usage.

Other remark: all that his also motivated by the nature of the strikers in today's football, they are better at playing football and supporting their teammates, with football becoming more tactical, teams need to involve all their players, they can't use a striker who will only be uselful in scoring situations because of that the wide players need to be bigger threat while the strikers need to be more creative.
 
Crossing with the weak foot is a much easier skill than dribbling or shooting with precision with the weak foot. So "inverted" wingers can still run down the touchline and put in crosses but Messi on the left would be totally unnatural if he were hindered to cut inside on his favoured foot. Neymar actually did play on the right in 13/14 under Martino in most games and it blatantely did look umcomfortable for him, so much so even Diego Simeone noted in a post match press conference that Neymar caused Atletico more problems on the left when he changed positions midgame than on the right. I guess it's natural for limited wingers who don't have much more to their game bar running and crossing to play on the same side as their strong foot but for players who have much more to their game playing "inverted" offers a lot more possibilities to do different things.
 
FCBarca said:
Plays on both flanks as do most Barcelona wingers
Click to expand...

This is my point, I don't get the obsession with wingers needing to play on a specific side, if you a good footballer at the level you should be able to play on either wing IMO. Otherwise you are just a lazy shite, who hasn't got time to practice with your weaker foot
 
Cassidy said:
This is my point, I don't get the obsession with wingers needing to play on a specific side, if you a good footballer at the level you should be able to play on either wing IMO. Otherwise you are just a lazy shite, who hasn't got time to practice with your weaker foot
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with being a good player, it's more about players characteristics, the dichotomy isn't inverted/non inverted but goalscorer/non goalscorer. A non goalscorer wide player can be used on both sides without too much problems granted that he can cross with his weak foot, but a goalscorer wil be weakened if his weak foot is in the outside.
Just look at strikers, left footed strikers prefer to run from right to left while right footed striker prefer to run from left to right. For example Henry vs Van Persie.
 
I'm all for the inverted winger provided you have the full back who can bomb on and attack the space that's been opened up. I had high hopes for Memphis and Shaw - that's not to say it won't work out eventually.

TBH, I'd do anything to see some exciting attacking wide play of any sort at the moment.
 
JPRouve said:
It has nothing to do with being a good player, it's more about players characteristics, the dichotomy isn't inverted/non inverted but goalscorer/non goalscorer. A non goalscorer wide player can be used on both sides without too much problems granted that he can cross with his weak foot, but a goalscorer wil be weakened if his weak foot is in the outside.
Just look at strikers, left footed strikers prefer to run from right to left while right footed striker prefer to run from left to right. For example Henry vs Van Persie.
Click to expand...

I like inverted wingers, or inside forwards etc. However apart from when they cut in and take a shot (the most predictable of events) it really shouldn't matter much which side they are playing on. Yes you may prefer to be on a specific side (Henry like you mentioned) but if he got a chance from the other side he was equally capable of dispatching the opportunity, also as a top level player I have no time for players who are not competent with their weaker foot anyway.

If you watch Depay he is so predictable playing on the left for United its laughable

EDIT: My main point really was that top level wide players wingers or inside forwards should be able to go both ways and be competent with both feet (obviously one will be better) and thus be good on either flank
 
You must log in or register to reply here.