Wingers - Where Are They?

[cityhead]

With all the discussion on here lately regarding team selection, tactics and formation the overriding argument has been the need for width, or more precisely wingers.

Having watched Arsenal reserves tonight it got me thinking about how many successful teams play with wingers. The Arsenal team had Theo Walcott but his first movement when Arsenal picked up the ball was to run in-field. The only two teams who play with anything like a winger and a big centre forward capable of heading a good cross in are Villa and Spurs (Man City arguably with SWP) and even then Ashley Young is predominantly right footed na dhas to stop, cut back and then cross. All other teams employ midfielders who move around the pitch and find space where ever that may be, and rather than put high balls into the box rely on threading a defence splitting pass for forwards to move onto.

MY limited understanding of why football has developed this way is because teams are so good at retaining possession, you don;t want to run the risk of giving the ball to the opposition if the winger loses his battle with the full back or crosses the ball which in effect creates a 50/50 situation and the opposition collect the cross and come away with the ball. And remember, possession is 9/10 of the law and you cannot score or win without possession.

The down side to all this is that football has lost the excitement that a winger and big centre forward brings to football, and I believe part of our dissapointment in recent performances has been that lack of excitement. Ivan Sproule for his part gave us some of that excitement against Leicester resulting in a wonderful goal, but had he crossed the ball NM and DH would not have seen much of the ball as per the Sheffield United game.

So, presumably we want excitiement rather than efficiency and the crowds wish is for a left sided 'winger' do we really need one and who would you choose? Let's not get involved in fantasy but keep within means and budget. I suspect the choice will be very limited.

[Gazred]

The battle between pace, power and technique and passing in football has reached its natural conclusion, you only need to look at Barcelona's domination of domestic and European football to see the merits of it. Its just taken a longer time to adopt this into the English game in the same way some of the other countries on the continent have. Seems gone are the days of a towering, powerful center forward, at least at the top level. The big men do still exist of course, only these days they must have the touch and speed required to compete at the top levels.

I think overall its best to have as much flexibility and adaptability from a squad as is possible, its not just GJ who likes to have all the "clubs in the bag".

[leedsred]

The battle between pace, power and technique and passing in football has reached its natural conclusion, you only need to look at Barcelona's domination of domestic and European football to see the merits of it. Its just taken a longer time to adopt this into the English game in the same way some of the other countries on the continent have. Seems gone are the days of a towering, powerful center forward, at least at the top level. The big men do still exist of course, only these days they must have the touch and speed required to compete at the top levels.

I think overall its best to have as much flexibility and adaptability from a squad as is possible, its not just GJ who likes to have all the "clubs in the bag".

I was speaking to a guy who's been heavily involved coaching and he believes wingers have been "coached out of our game".

Basically that when our youngster start out in the 5-9 age kids are taught as wide midfield players to be work horses. Working the line, tucking in to provide cover, teaching them to cross..... but certainly passing rather than the virtues of dribbling and beating players in 1 v 1 situations.

Aparently this is something the FA are looking to totally overhaul the way youngsters are coached in those early years.

Aparently bringing in lots of 4 v 4 matches so kids get lots of touches on the ball... but there maybe some coaches out there on this forum who have a bit more knowledge on this than me.

[mindjuicer]

There's also the tactic of having more players in the game at any time. If you attack with more and defend with more, you generally win.

This is another reason I liked McIndoe, he's good at defending. Sproule can track back tho.

Finally, the 3 lovely goals we scored on Tuesday had nothing to do with winger play or blistering pace. As I've said before, City fans generally have a winger fetish.

[Port Said Red]

There's also the tactic of having more players in the game at any time. If you attack with more and defend with more, you generally win.

This is another reason I liked McIndoe, he's good at defending. Sproule can track back tho.

Finally, the 3 lovely goals we scored on Tuesday had nothing to do with winger play or blistering pace. As I've said before, City fans generally have a winger fetish.

They used to call Ramseys '66 squad the wingless wonders, so it's taken some time for it to be the norm in the english game. I would suggest however that our first goal was a fantastic example of pace and wing play. As good as any I have ever seen.

[CiderHider]

The battle between pace, power and technique and passing in football has reached its natural conclusion, you only need to look at Barcelona's domination of domestic and European football to see the merits of it. Its just taken a longer time to adopt this into the English game in the same way some of the other countries on the continent have. Seems gone are the days of a towering, powerful center forward, at least at the top level. The big men do still exist of course, only these days they must have the touch and speed required to compete at the top levels.

I think overall its best to have as much flexibility and adaptability from a squad as is possible, its not just GJ who likes to have all the "clubs in the bag".

Yeah look how Spain took England apart in that friendly game, just awesome football, with all the power and fitness we had it made no difference, we just couldn't get the ball.

Cronaldo for instance was a scrawny pencil neck bag of bones when he joined utd, but had unbelievable technique, now he still has that technique but is built like a Premier League centre half brick 5h1thouse!

[22A]

I was speaking to a guy who's been heavily involved coaching and he believes wingers have been "coached out of our game".

Basically that when our youngster start out in the 5-9 age kids are taught as wide midfield players to be work horses. Working the line, tucking in to provide cover, teaching them to cross..... but certainly passing rather than the virtues of dribbling and beating players in 1 v 1 situations.

Aparently this is something the FA are looking to totally overhaul the way youngsters are coached in those early years.

Aparently bringing in lots of 4 v 4 matches so kids get lots of touches on the ball... but there maybe some coaches out there on this forum who have a bit more knowledge on this than me.

It was mentioned in a prog on Radio 5 some time back that if a kid gets the ball and starts running with it, team mates and the watching parents all yell at him to immediately pass or (even worse) boot it upfield.

[SecretSam]

A couple of other points: players are fitter and pitches are better - defenders are much more mobile now, so wingers can't just fly past them (think Dave Smith going past Alexander the Gas all those years ago, sniff, ah memories... ). And the pitches mean you can pass the ball along the deck better - witness Barcelona - and you can hardly argue they are bad to watch, but not a winger in sight.

Nowadays as someone else posted, strikers are more rounded - old fashioned number 9s just can't cut it - the first of the breed was (arguably) Vieri or maybe Van Nistlerooy - fast, strong, mobile, great technique, can finish with feet and head.

I'd argue that technically, today's players are way ahead of those even 10 years ago. I recall one of the '66 World Cup team (Charlton? (not the boring one)) admitting if that England team had played the current one (this was in the 90s) they'd get battered.

Football is cyclical - now teams play 4-5-1/4-3-3 whereas a while back it was 4-4-2, before that 3-5-2 mid-90s. When wingers re-emerge (which they will), they will be different: more muscular, able to pass and score, as well as beat the man. But right now, everyone does everything because players are more homogenous.

[Keith_Lemon]

I cant remember who made this comment but someone once said

"The Best Kind of Football is the Basic Football, but even that is the hardest"

Basically saying football should be pass and move, pass and move and when a chance is created its the strikers job to hit that ball on target.

Might of been Cloughie who said that

[chinapig]

What a good, intelligent thread and a pleasant change. It's certainly true that attacking players these days have wider (no pun intended) roles than when some of us were young(er). How for instance do you describe Ronaldo or Messi? The former is still called a winger by some but he is nothing of the sort and very few players are. More modestly and closer to home how would you describe Alan Walsh? Nominally a winger, he was superb at dropping deep and playing 50 yard passes and od course was often in the middle lashing in thunderbolts from all distances. How about Scotty? Was he berated for not being glued to the touchline but more often than not cutting inside and scoring and making goals? Now for me if we are to get the best out of Ivan he should not be confined to the wing as he scares the shit out of central defenders.

No point in letting nostalgia blind us to the way the game has changed. When I started supporting City every team had 2 wingers and a big centre forward (in our case 2). But as others have said standards of fitness, technique and pitches are light years ahead and that couldn't be sustained. Nor was it much cop against continental teams who moved ahead of us at least since the Hungarians thrashed England in the 50s' Can't see the clock being turned back now.

[mindjuicer]

They used to call Ramseys '66 squad the wingless wonders, so it's taken some time for it to be the norm in the english game. I would suggest however that our first goal was a fantastic example of pace and wing play. As good as any I have ever seen.

Fantastic dribbling and finishing, I agree. But you could conceivably see Skuse doing it and he's fast, but not Sproule-fast nor a winger. Maynard too at a push.

It's quite obvious and I'm not going to push it cos I'm not really looking for the the kind of backlash it would generate...

But, we have a bunch of armchair managers who didn't even know the formation we were playing, who have been spouting "width", "wingers" and "out of position" like something out of Life of Brian, seeing Sproule play and Sno moved to CM & a win and assume that they've been proven right.

It just ain't so. Sno was always going to be moved to play an advanced CM or AM as soon as his stamina improved.

Anyhoo, Time will probably be the cruel master it often is. It's not like with Trundle, where it was a fairly safe bet they'd never be proven wrong. We shall see what Sproule has against Donny no doubt.

[cityhead]

So, we all agree that 'traditional' wingers are dead.

I am still struggling to identify suitable left sided players who would add benefit to our current squad, apart from Messi, ronalpoo etc.

So, from now on knowing that there is a major shortage of such players why not go all out with a 4-2-1-3 formation with our best players using their pace and skill to frighten the opposition and start our own formation;

Gerken

Orr Carey ANO McAllister

Hartley Skuse

Sno

Haynes/Spoule Saborio Maynard

My guess is that 0-0 draws will be forgotten - but will we win more than we lose?

[mindjuicer]

Gerken

Orr Carey ANO McAllister

Hartley Skuse

Sno

Haynes/Spoule Saborio Maynard

You want our best goalscorer out on the left? :noexpression:

[cityhead]

You want our best goalscorer out on the left? :noexpression:

Firstly sorry, the formation didn't post as typed - will try again.

But, I also think you have missed the point. Maynard on the leftof Saborio does not mean he is 'out on the left'. Just playing upfront wth two other forwards to put pressure on the opposition defence.

.............................Gerken

Orr...............Care..................ANO.............McAllister

...................Hartley...............Skuse

.................................Sno

.......Haynes/Sproule..Saborio...Maynard

[22A]

Does this mean that Alan Skirton (right wing) and John Galley (centre forward) would not get into the City team today?

[DavidNoble]

So, we all agree that 'traditional' wingers are dead.

I disagree. I think they are alive and are as many as there were back in the 70s and that time the problem is two things mainly i think:

1. The game has moved on so much technologically than all mistakes on the pitch are seen easily (using prozone ecstera) so it could come up that a winger has lost the ball 4 times in 20 minutes which is deemed as awful but hes trying to beat his man and who knows the next time he could beat him and get a shot away and score a goal.

2. The other is that the game has moved on from how it was once you shoot we shoot sort of play. It is now alot about possession, especially at the highest level, and as wingers arent designed to do that they arent neccessarily needed.

I think there are plenty of wingers around its just managers dont think they need them from how the game has changed however i would say that Sheffield United got to the play-off final with wingers as did we. Wolves went up playing exciting football with Kightly and Jarvis so they are still here.

[Tunley Legend]

Ryan Giggs, Valencia, Theo Walcott, Aaron Lennon, SWP, Stewart Downing, Adam Johnson, Ashley Young, Kris Commons, Matty Jarvis, Lee Crofts, Ivan Sproule, Michael McIndoe, Michael Kightly

Just a few wingers of varying standards I could think of off the top of my head. Wingers are most certainly not dead. Yes, they do not totally hug the touchline having a few puffs from a Woodbine whilst waiting for the next pass to arrive their way AKA the 1950's!! They do cut in side and get shots off, they do go deep and hit longer passes, they do have to track back but one thing THEY STILL HAVE TO DO is get past their full back and get crosses in from the bye-line. That has not changed in football - doing that stretches an opposition back four and fitness, tactics, diet and the like will never change that.

[Portland Bill]

could

But, we have a bunch of armchair managers who didn't even know the formation we were playing, .

You cant get away with spouting rubbish like that.

You read on the website before the Leicester game that City were to play 4-3-3, you also read that Sproule was to play as a left winger!

Looking at the starting 11, it was clear to anyone with the slightest knowledge of our players that we were not playing 3 up front, Sproule was on the right, Haynes on the left and Maynard as the lone striker in a 4-5-1 set up.

The sooner you get off your high horse on this forum the better, no one is better than anyone on here but you seem to think you are the exception .

[CarlBCFC]

There's also the tactic of having more players in the game at any time. If you attack with more and defend with more, you generally win.

This is another reason I liked McIndoe, he's good at defending. Sproule can track back tho.

Finally, the 3 lovely goals we scored on Tuesday had nothing to do with winger play or blistering pace. As I've said before, City fans generally have a winger fetish.

so sproules goal had nothing to do with pace at all... :noexpression:

[SecretSam]

But, we have a bunch of armchair managers who didn't even know the formation we were playing, who have been spouting "width", "wingers" and "out of position" like something out of Life of Brian, seeing Sproule play and Sno moved to CM & a win and assume that they've been proven right.

I read an interview with Capello (who I think we all agree knows his stuff) and he said all this talk of 4-4-2 and 4-3-3 is simplistic journalism to explain how a team plays - when you look at real time analysis of where players actually play it's far more complicated. 2-2-1-2-1-1-1, anyone???? :noexpression:

[chinapig]

You cant get away with spouting rubbish like that.

You read on the website before the Leicester game that City were to play 4-3-3, you also read that Sproule was to play as a left winger!

Looking at the starting 11, it was clear to anyone with the slightest knowledge of our players that we were not playing 3 up front, Sproule was on the right, Haynes on the left and Maynard as the lone striker in a 4-5-1 set up.

The sooner you get off your high horse on this forum the better, no one is better than anyone on here but you seem to think you are the exception .

It takes two to tango. We would certainly have been 4-5-1 when Leicester had the ball but when we had it Ivan and Danny would join the attack. They would hardly do otherwise. At that point it would look more like 4-3-3 (or even 4-2-1-3 if Sno was just behind the front). Ivan was not pinned to the touchline or he would not have scored. Similarly people might assume that Cole Skuse's role was a defensive one but of course he broke forward to both score a goal and make one. In other words despite everybody's obsession with them formations are not rigid (thank heavens) and not the be all and end all. They're no more than convenient shorthand. :noexpression: