Inverted Wingers

[abailey123]

https://x.com/bbcmotd/status/1738711029817704691?s=46&t=Gx6yhb08D8-bYWhHr8HpCA

This analysis from Shearer on MoTD says it all. All season Hojlund has received a total of 11 passes from Garnacho and Antony combined. How our centre forward is supposed to score goals with that level of service is beyond me.

Call me old fashioned but I’ve watched united over the years with Beckham/Ronaldo on the right, Giggs on the left. Players who can get to the by-line and get a ball into the box - creating chances for the centre forward or anyone who dares to make a run into the box.

I certainly think we’d see a far better Antony on the left. Considering he’s the most 1 footed winger in the league it doesn’t make any sense playing him on the right when he’s not got a right foot. Play him on the left where he can be direct, go at players and get a ball in. Same on the right with Garnacho.

I’d champion the Inverted Wingers if either of them were creating chance after chance but the reality is we’re relegation standard in front of goal.

something has to give … I’d be interested to gather people’s thoughts

 

[Chipper]

A large part behind the idea of inverted wingers is that it enables them to score lots of goals. Seeing as Antony last scored in April it's definitely not worked for him! Garnacho isn't really prolific either. Could be worth a go to switch to orthodox wingers for that reason alone. We wouldn't be losing reams of our wide players' goals right now if we did.

Might be different if Rashford was scoring a lot from the left like last season as he's usually poor when played on the right in comparison.

No idea if Antony can even cross a ball from the left.

 

[Marwood]

Switching wingers around, it's the simplest change we could make now. It has to be tried but it won't. Todays managers are welded to their "philosophy"

 

[Revan]

There is nothing wrong with inverted wingers as long as they can score. Our best attacking play post SAF were with Rashford and Greenwood as inverted wingers, and Martial up front.

The issue is when the inverted wingers cannot score and have the decision-making of a flower. Then you have problems.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

https://x.com/bbcmotd/status/1738711029817704691?s=46&t=Gx6yhb08D8-bYWhHr8HpCA

This analysis from Shearer on MoTD says it all. All season Hojlund has received a total of 11 passes from Garnacho and Antony combined. How our centre forward is supposed to score goals with that level of service is beyond me.

Call me old fashioned but I’ve watched united over the years with Beckham/Ronaldo on the right, Giggs on the left. Players who can get to the by-line and get a ball into the box - creating chances for the centre forward or anyone who dares to make a run into the box.

I certainly think we’d see a far better Antony on the left. Considering he’s the most 1 footed winger in the league it doesn’t make any sense playing him on the right when he’s not got a right foot. Play him on the left where he can be direct, go at players and get a ball in. Same on the right with Garnacho.

I’d champion the Inverted Wingers if either of them were creating chance after chance but the reality is we’re relegation standard in front of goal.

something has to give … I’d be interested to gather people’s thoughts

Personally, I truly detest the concept. Everyone wants to use it yet most wide forwards are rank shit at the role and just make their sides predictable, slowing down attacks and kill width making it impossible to stretch teams. In addition to most of them playing it like strikers and trying to score themselves or get into scoring position. I will never understand why natural side wingers ever went out of style.

Personally I agree with both Shearer and you. I'd prefer us to play Anthony wide left and a Garnacjho or Rashford wide right. So that then can get outside their full back and just concentrate on good early crosses into the box. After all most fullbacks are just dreadfull at dealing with crossing. I'd expect us to get much joy from it. On top of being able to truly stretch teams even if they dared use a low block....

 

[Todd]

It's worth a shot, but as well as not having a right foot, I don't think Antony can beat his man down the line consistently anyway, so I have my doubts that he'd be any more productive on the left wing.

At least Garnacho has the ability to beat his man sometimes.

 

[lex talionis]

I’m not a fan of an attack that relies on inverted wingers. Or to be more precise about it, inveted wingers who are focused entirely on carving out their own chances and not creating chances for their striker.

If you have a Messi or Ronaldo then of course you build around them, but even if you have a Robben you still see Robben being to be eager to go to the byline for the cutback pass. You rarely ever see that from Rashford, Garnacho and Antony. You need exceptional players at the position to make an attack built around inverted wingers to work. Rashford and Antony, truth be told, are nothing all that special either as dribblers, passers or finishers.

 

[Gopher Brown]

The other problem with our inverted wingers is that when they come inside they clog up the area just in front of the penalty box, where Bruno and Hojlund (and, sigh, McTominay) need space to operate.

 

[stevoc]

You won't get a Ten Hag to even try Antony or Garnacho on the opposite flanks.

 

[RedRoach]

Personally, I truly detest the concept. Everyone wants to use it yet most wide forwards are rank shit at the role and just make their sides predictable, slowing down attacks and kill width making it impossible to stretch teams. In addition to most of them playing it like strikers and trying to score themselves or get into scoring position. I will never understand why natural side wingers ever went out of style.

Personally I agree with both Shearer and you. I'd prefer us to play Anthony wide left and a Garnacjho or Rashford wide right. So that then can get outside their full back and just concentrate on good early crosses into the box. After all most fullbacks are just dreadfull at dealing with crossing. I'd expect us to get much joy from it. On top of being able to truly stretch teams even if they dared use a low block....

Isn’t this what Moyes tried to do? Remember Fulham? Also Rashford is awful on the right

 

[GreatDane]

Isn’t this what Moyes tried to do? Remember Fulham? Also Rashford is awful on the right

Rashford is awful left and center as well.

 

[stefan92]

Personally, I truly detest the concept. Everyone wants to use it yet most wide forwards are rank shit at the role and just make their sides predictable, slowing down attacks and kill width making it impossible to stretch teams. In addition to most of them playing it like strikers and trying to score themselves or get into scoring position. I will never understand why natural side wingers ever went out of style.

Because it usually solves a problem. When you look at the tactical evolution, you see many teams moving from a classic 442 to a 433 or 4231 - essentially replacing their second striker by another midfielder. This gave more control over matches, but it obviously also means that you now have a lack of presence in the box. I guess you can see Spain around 2010 as the pinnacle of this problem - excellent at controlling matches, terrible at scoring, boring the world to death while winning all their matches 1-0 to grab three titles on the run. They deserved it, but it still shows the problem.

So how do you get back your presence in the box? Considering that all classic measures like box-to-box midfielders still exist and did that before and therefore are not the solution. A good option is an inverted winger who can join the striker in the box to offer the second option that classically the second striker was. That however in turn requires the full backs to ensure you width (which results in a pair like Lahm/Robben), or you really need wingers that are comfortable both scoring and assisting from an inverted position (I think the best at that was Ribery, and dare I say it Sancho showed potential to be that as well).

So why doesn't it work for United? The playmaking potential of the currently used inverted wingers is very limited and the fullbacks don't provide width on the necessary level to offer the assists instead of the wingers (which by the way means the pass numbers from Antony/Garnacho to Højlund are not the full problem - include the full backs into the picture and then it looks REALLY dire).

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Because it usually solves a problem. When you look at the tactical evolution, you see many teams moving from a classic 442 to a 433 or 4231 - essentially replacing their second striker by another midfielder. This gave more control over matches, but it obviously also means that you now have a lack of presence in the box. I guess you can see Spain around 2010 as the pinnacle of this problem - excellent at controlling matches, terrible at scoring, boring the world to death while winning all their matches 1-0 to grab three titles on the run. They deserved it, but it still shows the problem.

So how do you get back your presence in the box? Considering that all classic measures like box-to-box midfielders still exist and did that before and therefore are not the solution. A good option is an inverted winger who can join the striker in the box to offer the second option that classically the second striker was. That however in turn requires the full backs to ensure you width (which results in a pair like Lahm/Robben), or you really need wingers that are comfortable both scoring and assisting from an inverted position (I think the best at that was Ribery, and dare I say it Sancho showed potential to be that as well).

So why doesn't it work for United? The playmaking potential of the currently used inverted wingers is very limited and the fullbacks don't provide width on the necessary level to offer the assists instead of the wingers (which by the way means the pass numbers from Antony/Garnacho to Højlund are not the full problem - include the full backs into the picture and then it looks REALLY dire).

I get all that. Yet
For me I just hate it period. Especially because most times you end up like world cup wining Spain. Yet unlike them, if you aren't uber clinical you won't score at all!

I hate the tactic because of its over reliant on fullbacks being elite attackers for width and unless the inverting wide attacker understand where to go on the outside, or truly consistenly brilliant one on one, with speed and dribbling, they almost always run into heavy traffic against an organized, commited low block defence. That's how for example we easily frustated liverpool in spite of them all the ball. Which West ham in turn did to us, with our far worse wide attackers
. In Liverpool's casefor example they simply ended up having a whole host of shots from mostly bad scoring positions. Inspite of taking up like 34!

I'd rather play the classic 4-3-3/3-4-3 of Ajax in the LVG era than this inverted winger business. With the number 10 operating like second striker in attack. Allowing wingers to really stay wide and at track fullbacks to them. With midfield control achieved by a fullback inverting or a cb becoming the second pivot. Also especially because fullbacks the days a rather poor at defending actual good early crosses.

Then if extra clout is needed in the box when the ball is on one side, the far side winger can become a third man in the box.

 

[Rozay]

It’s a problem with personnel, not principle. We had no complaints when we had Rashford, Martial and Greenwood up top. The issue is our forwards neither score goals, nor do they create. Switching them could be worth a try, although we probably just really need to upgrade that department.

 

[stevoc]

Antony has been Dogshit all season I don't see him improving at all, Rashford is shit on the right and Pellestri isn't the answer. So we need to dip into the market for a rigth sided attacker in January or if Ten Hag get's the boot bring Sancho back.

Mad to think Ten Hag was probably planning to go into the season with Antony, Greenwood and Sancho as his options for the right wing.

 

[Oranges038]

It’s a problem with personnel, not principle. We had no complaints when we had Rashford, Martial and Greenwood up top. The issue is our forwards neither score goals, nor do they create. Switching them could be worth a try, although we probably just really need to upgrade that department.

I think this part of the problem.

The wide players aren't good enough to be isolated in the way they currently are. They need more support from the full backs and midfield, the issue is keeping the ball high enough up the pitch for long enough so that they are in positions to provide the support. Rashford, Greenwood and Martial were better at making the ball stick.

These forwards don't protect the ball well enough for that to happen, one of Garnacho's biggest faults is not being able to protect the ball. Antony is the similar, too weak and predictedable. So when they get isolated they get robbed of possession too easily and it comes straight back. It doesn't allow the players around them to get into positions to make supporting runs.

That being said even when they do get into good positions their decision making is pretty poor to say the least.

 

[Bwuk]

Doesn’t pretty much every single top team do it?

Its a personel issue, not the inverted wingers.

 

[Oscar Bonavena]

Inverted wingers is a good system if the inverted wingers are good.

 

[Crashoutcassius]

If you have inverted wingers, you rely on wide centre backs for the overlap. I think dalot is our main width

 

[Blood Mage]

Every top team plays with inverted wingers. The issue with us is that our team shape and movement is terrible and none of our players provide an option on the overlap apart from Shaw occasionally.

 

[Bobski]

Inverted wingers are generally guys who would have been strikers/poachers 20 years ago playing from wide. Great deal for them, don't have to play up top taking the kicking that strikers used to take and don't have to do the tracking back that traditional wingers had to do.

The next evolution of the role has to be guys who are comfortable going both ways, not just cut inside and shot spam but crosses and cut backs from the by-line as well. It really is a boring ass role to watch when you take out the odd highlight reel shot, but efficient for the modern game.

 

[davidmichael]

I don’t know if it’s so much inverted wingers that’s the problem and it being more so the players we have themselves as it wasn’t a problem when Ronaldo or Nani played on the left and we had Greenwood and Rashford/Martial doing well a few seasons back.

The problem is Antony has no variety to his game at all and is the most one footed player I’ve ever seen so all a defender has to do is show Antony the outside and he’ll pass it backwards whilst Garnacho is more a direct inside forward but not a prolific scorer, Rashford reverting to type isn’t helping either.

Look at City with Grealish/Doku and Silva/Foden, Liverpool with Diaz and Salah, Arsenal with Saka and usually Martinelli, Spurs with Kulusevski and Son, Villa with Diaby/Bailey/Coutinho/Buendia or even Chelsea with Palmer and Sterling just in the PL alone to see it does work with the right system, coaching and players yet we lack all of that.

 

[cyril C]

https://x.com/bbcmotd/status/1738711029817704691?s=46&t=Gx6yhb08D8-bYWhHr8HpCA

This analysis from Shearer on MoTD says it all. All season Hojlund has received a total of 11 passes from Garnacho and Antony combined. How our centre forward is supposed to score goals with that level of service is beyond me.

Call me old fashioned but I’ve watched united over the years with Beckham/Ronaldo on the right, Giggs on the left. Players who can get to the by-line and get a ball into the box - creating chances for the centre forward or anyone who dares to make a run into the box.

I certainly think we’d see a far better Antony on the left. Considering he’s the most 1 footed winger in the league it doesn’t make any sense playing him on the right when he’s not got a right foot. Play him on the left where he can be direct, go at players and get a ball in. Same on the right with Garnacho.

I’d champion the Inverted Wingers if either of them were creating chance after chance but the reality is we’re relegation standard in front of goal.

something has to give … I’d be interested to gather people’s thoughts

Problem is, Rashford, martial, Garnacho etc play like shit on the right. Now everyone want to play on the left, left foot or right foot

 

[Sunny Jim]

Full backs took the role of wingers. So in theory full backs should provide crosses from wide positions

 

[SouthMancRed]

Full backs took the role of wingers. So in theory full backs should provide crosses from wide positions

Ah yes, the wing back. Can't defend very well but can power up and down the wing all game while hitting the first man when trying to get crosses in. Great stuff.

 

[greater wall]

Full backs took the role of wingers. So in theory full backs should provide crosses from wide positions

Yes, the fullbacks should overlap and be able to put in crosses but they rarely take the opportunity to do so. The striker and the winger should be in the box becoming a second striker.

 

[dinostar77]

You won't get a Ten Hag to even try Antony or Garnacho on the opposite flanks.

this. drives me nuts.

 

[stevoc]

this. drives me nuts.

Yeah it is, and I have a sneaky suspicion Garnacho could actually be good and ping in a lot of good crosses from the right.

 

[sullydnl]

Full backs took the role of wingers. So in theory full backs should provide crosses from wide positions

The number of crosses have also generally declined over the years. As with long range shooting, analytics have had an impact on the game in that regard.

 

[SouthMancRed]

It's not even as if Antony has a variety of shooting options when he does try to score. It's the attempted curler into the keepers far top corner every time. Defenders sussed this out within a couple of months of him joining but I don't think he's realised absolutely everyone knows what's he's about to try and do.

 

[stevoc]

The number of crosses have also generally declined over the years. As with long range shooting, analytics have had an impact on the game in that regard.

True and you're right data analysis will have been partly responsible for that.

But I suspect the amount of wingers that play inverted now as opposed to even 10-15 years ago is much higher being less inclined to gone on the outside preferring to cut in on their stronger foot.

 

[Ibi Dreams]

It's worth a shot, but as well as not having a right foot, I don't think Antony can beat his man down the line consistently anyway, so I have my doubts that he'd be any more productive on the left wing.

At least Garnacho has the ability to beat his man sometimes.

Antony does fairly often get into space past the full back where he could potentially cross. He doesn't because he has no right foot or no confidence in it, but the opportunity is there.

On the left he could easily whip balls in from those situations - whether his delivery would be any good is another story

It would be interesting to see, but given we've got Rashford and Garnacho already I don't see him ever getting any time there

 

[tob]

As a manager, you have to look at the players in your squad and see what they're capable of. What role can they play, and what can they do for the team. The manager might have a preferred playing style, and that's all good, but if your squad isn't a right fit for it, then you need to adapt. The only time you can change the squad is when the transfer window is open, and even then you might not get your preferred targets and/or the signings might not turn out to be what you'd hoped for. So your best, or only, solution to a problem can't be "the need of better players", because that won't help you during the season.

Since, we seem to have a huge problem creating chances and scoring goals, no matter what players the manager chooses to play - I don't see any better solution than employing another way of playing. Like the ts, and others, have suggested, one way would be for the wingers to switch sides. Have a left-footed winger on the left side and a right-footed winger on the right side. I've been saying this for a while, and I think both Antony and Garnacho could provide more assistance in attack, if they were played in this way. I don't see anything wrong with just trying it.

I would also try and play with two strikers. A clean 4-4-2 with Hojlund and Rashford up top. At home, at Old Trafford, we should be able to afford playing with two strikers.

Full backs took the role of wingers. So in theory full backs should provide crosses from wide positions

Yes, the fullbacks should overlap and be able to put in crosses but they rarely take the opportunity to do so. The striker and the winger should be in the box becoming a second striker.

The way I see it - in an attacking position, the job of a fullback should mainly be a supporting role for the winger. Help the winger by creating space, taking up an opponent, or making themselves available for a pass. What mainly differentiates a winger from a fullback is the ability to take on, and beating, an opponent. That's why you'd want those one vs. one situations to be created for your wingers instead of your fullbacks, and the reason to why you'd want your wingers to play wide, instead of your fullbacks.

When it comes to crossing, I think both the winger and the fullback should have good crossing-qualities. However, if you're dependent on your fullback providing the crosses - it would, at the same time, most likely mean that the opponent has a full set of defenders in the box.
If your winger has a good cross in him (or her), the cross could, more often, come in at an earlier state. Meaning, the striker/ers would have less defenders to beat. Hence, it might be better to play with a left-footed winger on the left side, and a right-footed winger on the right side - so that they can hit that early cross - with their best foot.

 

[Amar__]

Our manager thinks there is nothing wrong with our setup.

 

[Abraxas]

I think it depends on the types of player you have. The wide players, the striker, the full backs you have. Also there aren't actually many good natural wide players anymore that get to the byline. It's died out.

Inverted wingers really needs good attacking full backs that move into and exploit the gaps. Ours only do that inconsistently. Dalot and Shaw love to think of themselves as playmakers not marauding full backs that really break opposition lines.

It needs wingers that sniff out goals at the far post. If you have narrow wingers not getting between the posts or making dynamic runs which Antony rarely does then they just become cut in and pass merchants. Predictable. Exactly what we are. But does moving him to the left change his makeup? Probably not, he still won't bomb past anyone and he still can't cross so ostensibly he'll be the same limited player. It's more about ability. Garnacho and Rashford show precisely nothing from the right either.

It would probably be good for Hojlund to have natural wingers that cross but given that our personnel are probably not good enough to make a big impact on the league irrespective of where we move them it's difficult for him get chances. To my eyes Garnacho, Bruno are already in their best roles and it's still useless so this looks like a moving deck chairs on the Titanic approach to me. I get we have to try something but it doesn't look to be anything too special with our players.

 

[tob]

I think it depends on the types of player you have. The wide players, the striker, the full backs you have. Also there aren't actually many good natural wide players anymore that get to the byline. It's died out.

Inverted wingers really needs good attacking full backs that move into and exploit the gaps. Ours only do that inconsistently. Dalot and Shaw love to think of themselves as playmakers not marauding full backs that really break opposition lines.

It needs wingers that sniff out goals at the far post. If you have narrow wingers not getting between the posts or making dynamic runs which Antony rarely does then they just become cut in and pass merchants. Predictable. Exactly what we are. But does moving him to the left change his makeup? Probably not, he still won't bomb past anyone and he still can't cross so ostensibly he'll be the same limited player. It's more about ability. Garnacho and Rashford show precisely nothing from the right either.

It would probably be good for Hojlund to have natural wingers that cross but given that our personnel are probably not good enough to make a big impact on the league irrespective of where we move them it's difficult for him get chances. To my eyes Garnacho, Bruno are already in their best roles and it's still useless so this looks like a moving deck chairs on the Titanic approach to me. I get we have to try something but it doesn't look to be anything too special with our players.

I'm just curious. If you were the manager what would you do?

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Isn’t this what Moyes tried to do? ...

tried is the operative word. SAF did it for years the right way

 

[Abraxas]

I'm just curious. If you were the manager what would you do?

I think it's more of a training pitch issue and getting everyone back fit issue than switching people out of position. At the end of the day none of these guys have ever been wingers that go on the outside and cross. So what makes us think they'd be better doing that than their usual role. It's just a hopeful punt but there's not much viability to it within our players.

Shaw and Dalot are able to cross from their natural side but it's not like that is mega effective for us, one of the issues highlighted with Hojlund was he's not the aerial threat his presence would dictate he probably should be. Dalot and Shaw should be able to get in low crosses, Bruno should be able to pull wide to find space and cross so it's not like inverted wingers stops that route to goal. It's just not actually a major threat at the moment so no real reason to pin hopes on it, we can still use it.

I think we have to work on our possession play, combinations in the final third, seeing Hojlund runs better. Hojlund has to get a better understanding with those around him too. It's all really stuff the manager should sort. End of the day most of the best personnel we have are out there. Get people fit and playing better.

 

[tob]

I think it's more of a training pitch issue and getting everyone back fit issue than switching people out of position. At the end of the day none of these guys have ever been wingers that go on the outside and cross. So what makes us think they'd be better doing that than their usual role. It's just a hopeful punt but there's not much viability to it within our players.

Shaw and Dalot are able to cross from their natural side but it's not like that is mega effective for us, one of the issues highlighted with Hojlund was he's not the aerial threat his presence would dictate he probably should be. Dalot and Shaw should be able to get in low crosses, Bruno should be able to pull wide to find space and cross so it's not like inverted wingers stops that route to goal. It's just not actually a major threat at the moment so no real reason to pin hopes on it, we can still use it.

I think we have to work on our possession play, combinations in the final third, seeing Hojlund runs better. Hojlund has to get a better understanding with those around him too. It's all really stuff the manager should sort. End of the day most of the best personnel we have are out there. Get people fit and playing better.

I mentioned crossings from fullbacks in a post, previous to addressing yours. If your crosses come in from your fullback, it will, most of the time, mean that the opponent has a full set of defenders in the box. Even if Dalot and Shaw has a good cross in them, it's likely that it will be harder for our attacking players to connect to it.


The way our wingers operate now, is that they always cut inside, balancing outside the penalty box. Their main aim seems to be, trying to get a shot on goal. Problem is, they rarely get a good shot in. And, statistically, how many goals are scored that way? Another play they do, is that they try and hit a curling cross at the back post, but then you need a runner into that area. If the cross is too weak, it will be headed away. If it's too hard, it will go out for a goal kick or straight at the goalkeeper.

So, why is it that our wingers are trying this so often? Well, it's the easy choice. It's what's most comfortable for them. Firstly, they want to have the ball on their favored foot. Secondly, they don't really have to beat their opponent. They just have to get that little clearance to get the shot/cross away. You can sometimes see Garnacho trying to go on the outside, but then he must beat his man, or cross/shot with with his weaker foot.

So, I do agree with you that something needs to happen at the training ground.


Statistically, most goals are scored around the 6-yard-box, so that's where you should aim for the final pass or play to end up.

I wouldn't say that switching sides for Garnacho and Antony is really equal to them playing in a position they're not used to. They'd still be wingers having the job of taking on and beating their opponent. I would suggest that having them switch sides, it would automatically make them more comfortable of going on the outside, as it would be with their preferred foot. Because of that, the possibility of finding that pass into the right area will be more possible, as I'd also suggest that hitting that pass into the box will be easier. Both by it being done more accurate with the right foot and also by it having more possible outcome. Having them playing on opposite side means that they'd be more focused on looking for a pass, rather than cutting inside and shooting.

I also think they'd be more unpredictable, as they would be more likely to alternate between going outside and inside. I think of Greenwood, coming in from the right, going inside, toward the center, but then cutting down towards the right side of the 6-yard-box and blast it in the near post with his right foot. I have no doubts that Garnacho could do the same. Or Antony on the opposite side.


I don't see how this is not even worth trying.

 

[MrBest]

I'm pretty sure at West ham antony was on the left and garnacho on the right. I just think the players are not being told to get the ball in the box. They are being told to take a man on and cut inside, look for the shot first and if not, find Bruno or mctom on the edge of the box. It's all too predictable.