City Losing A 'tradition'....?

[spudski]

For as long as I can remember, regardless of what Manager we've had, City have generally played with either one or two 'traditional' wingers.

I've said for years, that it's old fashioned and has held us back.

Whilst pleasing to the eye, when a 'winger' is in full flow taking on a full back, and whipping in a cross from the bye line... it is something that teams know how to defend against.

It has also led to our Midfield being too 'light' and to a lack of possession.

How refreshing it is to see, our manager adopting tactics that are relevant to playing 'football'.

It may look to narrow to some... but it's so much more effective having 4 midfielders that can rotate play.

It makes it so much more harder for the opposition to defend against.

Our width can come by that rotation and our full backs... when needed.

It's no coincidence we are now bossing games and having the majority of possession.

I hope our fans that complain of lack of width, start to understand it can be achieved without your 'traditional' winger.

Long may it continue... I've been fed up of watching the likes of Albert running into brick walls... our football now is so much more solid.

[Cowshed]

O'driscoll's side at Bournemouth Bournemouth did play with what could be looked upon as wingers. Wide players are still very much part of modern football. Wouldn't't get giddy over bossing Gillingham and drawing v Bradford. Passing football didn't spring to mind when some of the defenders went front to back. Same giddiness appeared after a decent result v Cardiff puff the magic dragons.

[redcityman]

Hear hear.

Long may it continue.

[Monkeh]

For as long as I can remember, regardless of what Manager we've had, City have generally played with either one or two 'traditional' wingers.

I've said for years, that it's old fashioned and has held us back.

Whilst pleasing to the eye, when a 'winger' is in full flow taking on a full back, and whipping in a cross from the bye line... it is something that teams know how to defend against.

It has also led to our Midfield being too 'light' and to a lack of possession.

How refreshing it is to see, our manager adopting tactics that are relevant to playing 'football'.

It may look to narrow to some... but it's so much more effective having 4 midfielders that can rotate play.

It makes it so much more harder for the opposition to defend against.

Our width can come by that rotation and our full backs... when needed.

It's no coincidence we are now bossing games and having the majority of possession.

I hope our fans that complain of lack of width, start to understand it can be achieved without your 'traditional' winger.

Long may it continue... I've been fed up of watching the likes of Albert running into brick walls... our football now is so much more solid.

different situations call for different tactics, some times you need to play the long ball some times playing on the deck is needed and sometimes wingers will be needed,

The problem is english football and english football fans in general most think you have to set up one way and play one way,

you don't you need different players and different tactics for different situations,

Finally we have a manager who seems to relise this he comes across as a deep thinker and will react to devloping situations

[spudski]

O'Driscoll's side at Bournemouth Bournemouth did play with what could be looked upon as wingers. Wide players are still very much part of modern football. Wouldn't't get giddy over bossing Gillingham and drawing v Bradford. Passing football didn't spring to mind when some of the defenders went front to back. Same giddiness appeared after a decent result v Cardiff puff the magic dragons.

No one is getting 'giddy'... tbh, if we had lost both matches, I would still be saying the same thing.

Of course we will adapt play accordingly, depending who we play against.

But in the past we have played with either one or two 'wingers' who have predominantly only played wide... hanging on the touch line.

This leaves us so open down the middle.

We now have midfielders that can adopt various positions all over the pitch. Also full backs that can adopt a wide role as well.

The problem we've had in the past, is our players have been too rigid in their 'traditional' positions.

Our movement and positional play is now so much more fluent...and adaptive.

It's mental nowadays to have players who are only wingers and can't adapt to other positions.

[Monkeh]

No one is getting 'giddy'... tbh, if we had lost both matches, I would still be saying the same thing.

Of course we will adapt play accordingly, depending who we play against.

But in the past we have played with either one or two 'wingers' who have predominantly only played wide... hanging on the touch line.

This leaves us so open down the middle.

We now have midfielders that can adopt various positions all over the pitch. Also full backs that can adopt a wide role as well.

The problem we've had in the past, is our players have been too rigid in their 'traditional' positions.

Our movement and positional play is now so much more fluent...and adaptive.

It's mental nowadays to have players who are only wingers and can't adapt to other positions.

our best period of football came when we had tinnion and murray on the wing, tinnion wouldn't hug the line he'd come inside and pass the ball around as well as linking up with bell and they would overlap each other where as murray would hug the touch line and cut inside but would also help out defensively,

we have had two wide players in that mold since, we've just had attacking wing players who wouldn't help out defensivly which has left us exposed,

It looks like we will be playing four central player (something that johnson use to get slagged off for trying to do) who can all play across the middle,

[Roe]

When Johnson tried this in his final season here he got accused of being boring, lacking ambition and being "out of his depth".

I don't think it's unique to us to usually have at least one winger, so I wouldn't say we're losing a tradition or anything. At the end of the day, it was only one game and against Bradford we played with 2 "wingers". It's a long season and I think all sorts of players will have to play their parts at different times.

[spudski]

When Johnson tried this in his final season here he got accused of being boring, lacking ambition and being "out of his depth".

I don't think it's unique to us to usually have at least one winger, so I wouldn't say we're losing a tradition or anything. At the end of the day, it was only one game and against Bradford we played with 2 "wingers". It's a long season and I think all sorts of players will have to play their parts at different times.

What 'wingers' played against Bradford?

[David Brent]

I'd say City losing has been a tradition...

You are spot on and I share your hope that fans accept that playing without wingers is the way we're going.

Playing this way its important to have decent full backs. Thankfully SOD recognised that was missing.

[LondonBristolian]

different situations call for different tactics, some times you need to play the long ball some times playing on the deck is needed and sometimes wingers will be needed,

The problem is english football and english football fans in general most think you have to set up one way and play one way,

you don't you need different players and different tactics for different situations,

Finally we have a manager who seems to relise this he comes across as a deep thinker and will react to devloping situations

So much this. And I think, because SOD is a deep thinker, he will get another wide player.

Obviously it's important to have a Plan A and a consistent style of playing but you also need to vary things when you've got injuries that affect your plans or come up against teams that successfully counter your preferred way of playing. For all the talk of the death of traditional wingers, I'd argue the failure of Man City to have one in their squad is the exact reason they lost the league and precisely why they've signed Navas this year.

I certainly don't think City have to play with wingers week-in and week-out but I think a lack of wingers even on the bench is a potential weakness.

[Roe]

What 'wingers' played against Bradford?

Wagstaff and Bryan. Of course you could argue that they're not pure wingers but they both played out wide in that game.

[Monkeh]

Wagstaff and Bryan. Of course you could argue that they're not pure wingers but they both played out wide in that game.

they played as wide midfielders not as wingers both came in and helped out, a winger will normally stay out wide and waite for the ball

[exiledinwatford]

When Johnson tried this in his final season here he got accused of being boring, lacking ambition and being "out of his depth".

err that's because it was boring and he obviously was "out of his depth" - probably should have stuck to what he knew.

[numbeast]

We have attacking width in Cunningham and Maloney without having to play traditional wingers. The beauty is we have midfield players who are comfortable dropping back to cover them when they bomb forward. By playing wide a midfielder rather than an out and out winger should, in theory, enable us to retain possession better and bring JET into play more often.

[Aizoon]

Look at JET's dribble on YouTube on another thread. Awesome!

[downendcity]

We have attacking width in Cunningham and Maloney without having to play traditional wingers. The beauty is we have midfield players who are comfortable dropping back to cover them when they bomb forward. By playing wide a midfielder rather than an out and out winger should, in theory, enable us to retain possession better and bring JET into play more often.

Even better, we now seem to have midfielders who are comfortable on the ball and can retain possession.

Spain played in last year's Euros without a recognised striker but were still a potent attacking force, because their ability to control the ball gave them more options going forward. I'm not suggesting we are in Spain's class by any means, but if we can control the ball in midfield then I don't see that we need a winger, in the traditional sense, as we should be able to attack from any position on the pitch and agree that the full backs become our wide attackers when required.

[Roe]

they played as wide midfielders not as wingers both came in and helped out, a winger will normally stay out wide and waite for the ball

Then I guess it's down to interpretation. For me, they were both more like wingers against Bradford whereas there was a clear difference last night with Pack and Elliott in the middle instead.

It's definitely nice to see us having more options in this regard anyway.

[A Horse With No Name]

Then I guess it's down to interpretation. For me, they were both more like wingers against Bradford whereas there was a clear difference last night with Pack and Elliott in the middle instead.

It's definitely nice to see us having more options in this regard anyway.

I wouldn't call either Bryan or Wagstaff wingers, but I do believe that this is maybe the way forward. Having said that, I think we should do it the Ian Woosnam way and have one more club in your bag than you actually need, and sign an out and out winger, to use from the bench when all else fails.

[pongo88]

It is possible, though rare, to have wingers who have a high work rate and help out in midfield / defence. George Armstrong was an Arsenal winger in the 70s who ran non stop. Also, and I hate to say it, Steve Coppell (boo hiss) was a hard working winger in his playing days.

[spudski]

It is possible, though rare, to have wingers who have a high work rate and help out in midfield / defence. George Armstrong was an Arsenal winger in the 70s who ran non stop. Also, and I hate to say it, Steve Coppell (boo hiss) was a hard working winger in his playing days.

Spot on... but you hit the nail on the head when you said the 70's... and Coppell and Hill in the 80's ran rings around people.

But times have moved on. Defences are harder to break down. There is less space these days and teams are more organised.

As for Wagstaff and Bryan being wingers, as someone else said... I totally disagree. Both are midfield players that can play wide if needed. Totally different.

It's been lovely to see some threaded balls through for our full backs and midfielders to run onto, instead of Ball to feet on the touchline as Albert so often needed.