maldini too As much as we all want a FLFLB it’s sometimes deliberate to ‘invert’ a full back with a view to them building play centrally as pep does. The preferred foot matters less. Also as more and more sides play inverted wingers who cut in on their favoured foot the more it actually makes sense for defenders to be defending them on their strongest side. In short it’s not the big deal it used to be. And it’s no bad thing to have left and right footed fullbacks on your books who are comfortable at left back.
Strangely though you don’t see many left footed right backs countering the right footed wingers cutting inside.
I was going to cover that but couldn’t be arsed. In principle it should work the same both sides but there just aren’t enough left footers about. So right footers get used to having to play left back and get used to it… doesn’t happen the other way round. same deal with centre backs.
I like FLFFLB more for the attacking side of things. That's where Poly's point becomes more important. Playing the ball down the line can be tricky with your wrong foot but crossing is much harder and it's annoying to see players cut back on to their favoured foot to cross the ball which delays the cross and the space inside the box has often closed by the time the ball gets there. I much prefer an early ball in which swings away from the keeper. Alot of our goals last season were tap ins from close range due to early balls in. Suppose it's just balance really. IMO it become even more important if you have a right footed left winger. He wants to cut inside which allows a FLFFLB the chance to overlap. The defence can't get set as easily because they don't know if the face an inswinger or an outswinger. I stand by the central players don't really matter argument.
don't diasgree fella - firpo can charge on the overlap and play those cut backs from the byline or swing a cross in earlier as you say... byram cuts back on his right and plays the ball square. Not that uncommon to play one fullback inverted (typically left back) where the winger's the wide man and one traditional overlapping one who's higher up the pitch. my point really was that as the game has changed the role of fullback has seen a lot of variation
I think Andreas Bremhe (German who played for AC Milan and scored the winning penalty in the final of Italia '90) was right sided too - he scored the winning penalty with his right foot The question is though - how much better would have been if he's played on the right ???
You have to give your criteria for necessity Sure, a right sided player CAN play left back - just witness Stuart Dallas under Bielsa at Leeds But I maintain that if you take two full backs of relatively equal ability - one right sided and one left sided - the left sided player will perform significantly better at left back. I used to play lawn tennis - I was OK, but nothing special Yet I might've beaten Andy Murray IF you forced him to play left handed.
You’re not telling me a right footed player is only allowed to use his left foot so a totally irrelevant comparison. Imagine a line running the full length of the pitch, through the centre circle and two penalty spots, should a right footed player never venture to the left side of that line
I’m not talking about full backs, the original point was central defenders and though I don’t know the numbers, I’m guessing that there are more right footed players who play on the left. I’m saying because they play centrally on the pitch it’s less important which foot they favour.
No I'm not Where have I suggested that ANY player in any position is only allowed to play the ball with a specific foot ? I think you're running out of a counter argument and are instead resorting to a dishonest straw-man. A professional footballer should be able to play the ball with either foot That said, there are many footballers who can't Diego Maradonna was one - the man Jimmy Greaves once called "the greatest one footed player since Puskas". The point is that yes, a right footed player should be able to pass/shoot with his left foot - but even if he can, unless he's a one-in-a-million ambidextrous person, there's no way that he'll be as good, with his left foot, as a left sided player (assuming roughly equal ability). Moreover, a right sided player, playing at left back, will naturally seek to shift the ball on to his right before playing it. This serves to narrow the team's shape.
I think the point is valid for most outfield positions and whilst is is more applicable to full backs and wingers, I still think it applies to center backs as well - though perhaps not to the same degree.
You’re all wrong. A professional footballer doesn’t need any foot. Ability to Run and fall Over a la Grealish and you’d be in running for a ballon dor
Ambidexterity for the population is 1:100 or 1% - yet it’s 18% for professional footballers - suggesting it’s an advantage. Surprised it’s that high but shows that it’s an advantage as a footballer to be ambidextrous… or ambipedal if we’re being pedantic… Which obviously I am.
Your tennis analogy suggested it, where you said Andy Murray could play against you using only his left arm and you might win.
