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 a right footed player he’s 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.
