Right-footed Left Backs at Right Back

[Physiocrat]

In the League drafting thread the question arose whether Denis Irwin was equally good at left and right back. I made the following case.

"It is like Maldini playing at right-back. The only reason Maldini or Irwin played left back is because there was no-one good enough who was left-footed to play there. So the most technically adept right-footed full-back played left back. Which explains most of the Zanetti or Lahm at left-back. Switching a right footed left back to RB is very different.

The only reason they would be worse at right back is going forward and only if they liked to cut inside and put in in-swinging crosses with their right foot (like Ashley Young). Or they were an odd LB/CM hybrid like Breitner. Neither Irwin or Maldini were like this. So I would say they would be equally good at RB than LB, if not better.

Defensively the only reason to keep them at LB would be because you had a left footed right winger who cut in a lot and so would have their strongest foot on the inside but this is just a specific tactical choice."

What's everyone else's thoughts on the matter?

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

The only reason they would be worse at right back is going forward and only if they liked to cut inside and put in in-swinging crosses with their right foot (like Ashley Young). Or they were an odd LB/CM hybrid like Breitner. Neither Irwin or Maldini were like this. So I would say they would be equally good at RB than LB, if not better.

If memory serves me right, Irwin did move a fair bit into the left central areas. I wouldn't classify him as a flank only player in an attacking sense from the left side.

But when it comes to flank play, I rate his right side the same as his left side. I provided evidence for that in one of my games. The gifs sadly have expired now.

 

[Physiocrat]

If memory serves me right, Irwin did move a fair bit into the left central areas. I wouldn't classify him as a flank only player in an attacking sense from the left side.

That's interesting, I did not remember that. If true then I could see why he would favour the left side.

 

[Copa Mundial]

It quite simply depends on how good the fullback is with his non dominant foot. If the fullbacks non dominant foot is poor it makes passes down the line and passes inside more difficult. You either have to use your weaker foot or open your body up to use your dominant foot which inevitably slows down play. (Hopefully that makes sense)!

Personally I prefer fullbacks playing on their naturally footed side.

 

[Physiocrat]

It quite simply depends on how good the fullback is with his non dominant foot. If the fullbacks non dominant foot is poor it makes passes down the line and passes inside more difficult. You either have to use your weaker foot or open your body up to use your dominant foot which inevitably slows down play. (Hopefully that makes sense)!

That makes sense which is why right-footed left-backs tend to be reasonably good with their left foot.

Personally I prefer fullbacks playing on their naturally footed side.

I agree.

On a side note, does anyone remember a left-footer playing right-back ever? Not necessarily continually but just in a one off game.

 

[Synco]

I guess in today's football, those who weren't practically two-footed would usually be right backs, insofar they'd be used as fullbacks at all. Just what happened to Lahm when LvG modernized the conceptual side of Bayern's (and by extension Germany's) football. Maldini would probably be a full time center back.

Has such a speculative transfer to another position been usually accepted in draft games, when a player never actually played that way? (Not meaning Maldini here of course, who did play at CB.)

 

[Fenômeno]

Depends on the ability of the player, for example someone like Zanetti could seamlessly transfer to both flanks and be just as good

 

[Physiocrat]

I guess in today's football, those who weren't practically two-footed would usually be right backs, insofar they'd be used as fullbacks at all. Just what happened to Lahm when LvG modernized the conceptual side of Bayern's (and by extension Germany's) football. Maldini would probably be a full time center back.

Has such a speculative transfer to another position been usually accepted in draft games, when a player never actually played that way? (Not meaning Maldini here of course, who did play at CB.)

Draft voters can be quite conservative at times. I remember @Ecstatic putting Camacho at right-back once which didn't go down that well IIRC (although it may have been a man marking job).

Re-Maldini, I do think his ability going forward is under-rated. He would have been an interesting choice for the sort of attacking LCB in Southgate's 352 in the World Cup last year.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

That's interesting, I did not remember that. If true then I could see why he would favour the left side.

I'll share some gifs in a few hours once am free.

 

[Gio]

On a side note, does anyone remember a left-footer playing right-back ever? Not necessarily continually but just in a one off game.

Scotland played Tierney there recently with Robertson occupying the left-back slot. Didn't work that well because he cut onto his stronger foot a lot and into the more crowded central areas of the park. So you need another means of creating the width on the right side.

 

[Physiocrat]

I'll share some gifs in a few hours once am free.

 

[GodShaveTheQueen]

I am sure everyone has seen this, but let me leave this for starters

 

[Šjor Bepo]

I know percentage wise right footers are dominant all over the pitch but its still strange that 90% of GOAT leftbacks are right footed.
Tbf different players feel comfortable in different areas, never understood obsession with natural foot on each sides, there was time here when people were even questioning fecking midfielders in midfield 2 for being on right or wrong side
Another thing i dont understand is "defending your stronger side"....personally, i was more comfortable defending my "weaker" side and im sure there are a lot of people like that.

Back on topic, i wouldnt rate and i dont rate Irwin/Maldini the same on the right side.

 

[Skizzo]

I know percentage wise right footers are dominant all over the pitch but its still strange that 90% of GOAT leftbacks are right footed.
Tbf different players feel comfortable in different areas, never understood obsession with natural foot on each sides, there was time here when people were even questioning fecking midfielders in midfield 2 for being on right or wrong side
Another thing i dont understand is "defending your stronger side"....personally, i was more comfortable defending my "weaker" side and im sure there are a lot of people like that.

Back on topic, i wouldnt rate and i dont rate Irwin/Maldini the same on the right side.

Im sure that was a result of @antohan exploring every possible avenue of contention that he could

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

The tactical aspect of the game has changed. Rather than one footed wingers (a la Giggs) we now have lots of Inverted Wingers and Wide Forwards dominating the game. These players like to cut in often and not not as touchline hugging as traditional ones, so having inverted full backs might help in this too.

 

[antohan]

Im sure that was a result of @antohan exploring every possible avenue of contention that he could

I stand by the idea that some CMs are more comfortable on one side than the other.

You obviously don't turn shit just for being swapped, but it could definitely limit the impact or ability to display certain qualities

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

I wouldn't play Davids or Van Hanegem or Masopust on the right.

 

[Šjor Bepo]

I stand by the idea that some CMs are more comfortable on one side than the other.

You obviously don't turn shit just for being swapped, but it could definitely limit the impact or ability to display certain qualities

in a midfield two?

 

[Enigma_87]

In the League drafting thread the question arose whether Denis Irwin was equally good at left and right back. I made the following case.

"It is like Maldini playing at right-back. The only reason Maldini or Irwin played left back is because there was no-one good enough who was left-footed to play there. So the most technically adept right-footed full-back played left back. Which explains most of the Zanetti or Lahm at left-back. Switching a right footed left back to RB is very different.

The only reason they would be worse at right back is going forward and only if they liked to cut inside and put in in-swinging crosses with their right foot (like Ashley Young). Or they were an odd LB/CM hybrid like Breitner. Neither Irwin or Maldini were like this. So I would say they would be equally good at RB than LB, if not better.

Defensively the only reason to keep them at LB would be because you had a left footed right winger who cut in a lot and so would have their strongest foot on the inside but this is just a specific tactical choice."

What's everyone else's thoughts on the matter?

To be fair players like Brehme, Nedved, Irwin that are genuinely two footed will make no difference which side of the pitch they play as it really won't impact their game one bit.

If you play Valencia on the left they you obviously have a problem.

It also depends on the era you are looking at. If it is modern times it would make sense to have a right footed left back, as most of the wingers aren't orthodox ones and like to cut inside to the weaker foot of the defender.

Also you should bear in mind that lefties are generally a lot less in numbers compared to right footed players, which of course makes it more common to have right footed full backs.

 

[antohan]

in a midfield two?

Less than in a diamond, for instance, but still, yeah.

 

[Synco]

Re-Maldini, I do think his ability going forward is under-rated. He would have been an interesting choice for the sort of attacking LCB in Southgate's 352 in the World Cup last year.

I've read there was a draft idea to do historic formations with modern players (which sounds cool). Maybe current tactics with only historic players would be interesting as well, trying to match their traits with today's requirements. Although keepers would probably have to be exempt.

Just a thought, not an active player anyway.

 

[Physiocrat]

To be fair players like Brehme, Nedved, Irwin that are genuinely two footed will make no difference which side of the pitch they play as it really won't impact their game one bit.

If you play Valencia on the left they you obviously have a problem.

It also depends on the era you are looking at. If it is modern times it would make sense to have a right footed left back, as most of the wingers aren't orthodox ones and like to cut inside to the weaker foot of the defender.

Also you should bear in mind that lefties are generally a lot less in numbers compared to right footed players, which of course makes it more common to have right footed full backs.

Agree with all of that. Valencia on the left would be terrible. My main point was that right-footed left backs should be as good (in most cases) at RB than LB. In principle a left-footed right book for the same reason would be equally good at left-back, it's just I don't know any left footed right backs

I've read there was a draft idea to do historic formations with modern players (which sounds cool). Maybe current tactics with only historic players would be interesting as well, trying to match their traits with today's requirements. Although keepers would probably have to be exempt.

Just a thought, not an active player anyway.

It's worth looking at the Remake Draft, there's lots of interesting stuff.

http://www.redcafe.net/threads/the-remake-draft.417717/

The issue with doing modern systems with historic players is that there isn't enough variety post-1995 in systems IMO to make it sufficiently interesting. What might work is another remake draft with some alterations to the sides to include something like Pep's Barca etc

 

[Michaelf7777777]

It's worth looking at the Remake Draft, there's lots of interesting stuff.

http://www.redcafe.net/threads/the-remake-draft.417717/

The issue with doing modern systems with historic players is that there isn't enough variety post-1995 in systems IMO to make it sufficiently interesting. What might work is another remake draft with some alterations to the sides to include something like Pep's Barca etc

I think another way which might work is to make every player from history available but ban participants from choosing anyone who either played for the team or played under the manager within 5 years of the side that they are trying to remake.

 

[Physiocrat]

I think another way which might work is to make every player from history available but ban participants from choosing anyone who either played for the team or played under the manager within 5 years of the side that they are trying to remake.

That could work. Oh and yes, definitely at least ban players who appeared in the side, appearing in the remake.