Over the last 10 years or so new formations have meant that the natural winger who hugs the touchline is now a thing of the past. International teams rely on forwards that can run wide from narrow positions to receive the ball. This ensures that the defender is forced out of position creating a gap for midfield players to exploit. In the GB V Egypt we saw that when the ball was hit from the back along the touchline, the majority of the time possession was conceded or the ball simply went out of play. The reason for this is that the game has changed over the last few years in that power and pace are increasingly more important then before.
The evolution started with the use of astro playing surfaces, which meant that ball speed was far greater then it had been before. Player techniques changed to suit a pitch where the ball runs truer and it meant that players with greater stick/ ball skills weren’t the dominant force on astro pitches. Instead those players that were fitter, quicker and more powerful started dominating the style of play.
International teams such as Germany rely on bypassing the midfield and getting the ball in attacking positions through power and pace.
Although general fitness of International players has improved significantly over the last 10 years or so it hasn’t, in my opinion, evolved as fast as the game strategy. The GB players in conceding possession were just not able to get into position on the touchline in advanced positions when the ball was hit long. This was due to the lack of anticipation or timing of the run. Forwards were sprinting to wide positions and had to ensure that they lost the defender, reached the pass, controlled the ball and kept possession while waiting for support in the D.
Too many things to do in a short space of time meant that it just never came off. Note how hockey games, even at International level, tend to be end to end. This isn’t because its attacking hockey necessarily but more so because teams concede possession. The use of rolling subs means that players can play at a high pace because they will have the opportunity to rest.
The use of width by having a natural winger has an advantage that if the player is man marked then this effectively moves an opposing player out of position. It also means that teams that rely on protecting the space in front of the D have to realign their defence to counteract the threat coming from wide field. Having two wingers will compound the problem for the defence. If the Defence decide not to pursue the man marking tactic the attacking team has in effect one or two players in space in wide areas of the field that can receive the ball and KEEP possession. If the defence man marks then it means that players have to play out of position. I have seen many defenders confused as to what their role is when a team does play with genuine wingers.
The effective use of width in today’s game by employing wingers is the way forward. In a way its back to the old days. Wide players receiving the ball, taking on the defender, getting to the by-line (making defenders run backwards facing their own goal, crossing the ball for the attackers to whip into the back of the goal.
Those coaches who insist on their forward players running from inside to out are way behind the times, the players get found out. Of course during a course of a game there will be times that this will need to be done but the art is in making sure that the team can play both ways. Natural width in attacking situations is an option that most coaches tend to ignore in favour of a more defensive strategy of protecting the inner part of the pitch, playing narrow.
Putting bodies and congesting the danger areas. Wide players can exploit this by being able to receive the ball, keeping possession and forcing the defence out of their comfort zone into a different kind of battleground.
