El Cujo wrote:Well I think the argument there is that fullback is probably the shallowest position in football. It has the feel of almost the 'leftover' position for players that aren't great anywhere else (I know, simplifying it a bit). I know Ajax used to scout attacking players and then convert them to wingbacks for example.

On the other hand, this leaves the question why there are so few really good fullbacks - if it is so easy to convert players to FB, shouldn't they be able to excel there, too? And if they don't excel, wouldn't that mean that the position is a bit more difficult after all?

El Cujo wrote:Well I think the argument there is that fullback is probably the shallowest position in football. It has the feel of almost the 'leftover' position for players that aren't great anywhere else (I know, simplifying it a bit). I know Ajax used to scout attacking players and then convert them to wingbacks for example.

I immediately thought of this hilarious exchange after reading that.
Carra

Spoiler:

I thought this should better be in a thread of its own and not an off-topic digression in the Best Player thread...

So my question is - why is it that FB is a position that is treated like a red-headed stepchild? After all, it seems that it is not so useless after all and many teams seem to desperately search for a top-class fullback.

It is true that sometimes wingers or even strikers are more or less sucessfully converted to FBs (Jürgen Klopp has quite a hand doing that - see Lukasz Piszczek or recently Erik Durm), but still it doesn't seem to be as easy a position that it can be looked down upon as "last resort of failed attackers".

(As for the above video - maybe it has to do more with Gary Neville than with his position )

Well first off, fullbacks have to have good fitness, good 1v1 defending, and arr usually the best athletes on their teams. In addition, they need to know how to beat the opposing fullback and attack space and pass well

Long story short, fullbacks are all rounders with exceptional athletic or tactical ability. Its just a coincidence that fullbacks, good ones are hard to find. Thats because the position demands so much

The problem with being a full back is that it's really hard, and you don't get much glory for it. Not often in the position to score and you don't really lead the back line or command the defense.

It is my favorite position to play, so I have no idea why it doesn't get more love.

Yeah it's a lot of work on both ends of the pitch, without the recognition

I imagine anybody with a skill set to play wide prefer to play as a Winger

Sadly as a left footer I know that every young coach and P.E teacher ever automatically sees you as a full back
I was shit as a full back, too slow too big at that age group, crap out wide but nope left foot = play at least 10 games as a full back

Disagree with the OP. I don't think it's a leftover position. It's quite fun playing wide from my personal experience. Granted I was never a fullback but I did play there few times and seeing others play while also seeing coaches coach those players, it's certainly not a leftover position and can be asserted as somewhat an important position

A Fullback is responsible for defending against wingers who are more often than not the opposition's key players. Adding to that, a fullback also has the responsibility to provide the width if the team's own wide men comes inside and then the job is on the fullbacks to overlap and provide the attacking threat.

IMO it's as important as any other position. There is certainly not a lack of players coming through in those positions. It's just that football is constantly evolving and sometimes focus comes to focusing on one position being more important in certain times than the other. Like the focus on 10s is huge these days.

I'm left footed, but the only time I ever got to play was in elementary school.. And I was the tallest so the coaches always made me goal keeper and I hated it. Would have loved to be a fullback if it meant i got to play ffs.

Then later levels in school there weren't men's teams because not enough guys in my school wanted to play. Only women's teams. And none of my friends ever wanted to get a match going, not enough d them like the sport either

Livin' in Amer-i-caaa....

Not enough MEN wanted to play

They had WOMANs teams

lmaooooooo for me and everybody else in England, there was maybe 2 girls interested in football per school

Tomwin Lannister wrote:Not enough MEN wanted to play

They had WOMANs teams

lmaooooooo for me and everybody else in England, there was maybe 2 girls interested in football per school

I live in Connecticut, the Mecca of women's sports, I swear.

All the guys played nfl football, because we won all the time so American football scouts came to watch the games a lot.. But we had a really expensive field that was built and they had to get the girls to play something on it and the majority of them played soccer. For fun one time the girls said I should play with them I joined in their practice but I tackled this one girl and I missed the ball and hit her leg and she started to cry and that was the last time I played

Well in football it's usually the attacking positions that are the most popular. CB because it's right in the middle and GK, well because it's the GK. That leaves the fullback positions as the least favoured.

I wouldn't say fullbacks are not popular. I played as a winger when I was younger but my stamina and hard working ethic together with my okay defending had my coach put me back a position. Granted I did lack the technique and pace to be a tricky winger so I guess being a fullback was the second choice on the list but it works.

Nevertheless I really enjoy playing in this position. Other than keeping the offside line with the rest of your defence, it is a relatively stupid-proof position to play. You don't need to be creative like a midfielder or have good finishing like a winger/striker. There are times when I was play against super wingers that don't not allow you to really bomb forward all match (until they were tired) so knowing when to hold back and when to overlap is quite important.

In terms of popularity, obviously goal scoring positions are more popular. Growing up in London it was quite difficult to get into a good team and play in an attacking role because black kids are more physically matured (stronger and quicker) during early teenage years than someone like myself but most seemed to stagnate while I improved. At college I play on the wing from time to time especially when we need to press.

Personally I love it when I see a good centre back but I'm too impatient to play this position. Though I play as one in a 6-a side league, playing centre back in 11 a side is a completely different animal to 6-a aside. But it is a popular position with more intelligent and 'lazy', physical players who don't mind shouting at you.

The most unpopular: goalkeeper. Simply put. you're either a keeper or you ain't.

danyjr wrote:The most unpopular: goalkeeper. Simply put. you're either a keeper or you ain't.

*g* Well, I can imagine why that position is unpopular in England - and of course one sees what comes from that stance

RoundeRs I don't know even Baseball's rules (very unpopoular sport here ) .

anyway I've played always as fullback , so I disagree with OP.
I think it 's the Goalkeeper tbf .All accept to play in different roles,  but the GK likes only to who is really GK . I mean , I play sometimes to futsal with my friends and if we don't have a GK we must make in turn for it ... every goal conceded or scored there is change of GK , so all must do it . And noone is so glad when it is your turn

Having an actual GK is essential to any team imo.

Back when I played football in the neighborhood, my team was probably the only team that lacked a proper GK, and we suffered for it.

And you can't say that we did because we were a shit team, because when we did manage to get hold of an actual GK, we managed to win.

On topic, I used to play as a CB-FB, not because I particularly enjoyed those positions, but because the rest of my team were all morons who bombed forward and did not have the stamina to get back. I took one for the team, and was often left as the only guy in the back playing without an offside rule

rwo power wrote:I thought this should better be in a thread of its own and not an off-topic digression in the Best Player thread...

So my question is - why is it that FB is a position that is treated like a red-headed stepchild? After all, it seems that it is not so useless after all and many teams seem to desperately search for a top-class fullback.

It is true that sometimes wingers or even strikers are more or less sucessfully converted to FBs (Jürgen Klopp has quite a hand doing that - see Lukasz Piszczek or recently Erik Durm), but still it doesn't seem to be as easy a position that it can be looked down upon as "last resort of failed attackers".

(As for the above video - maybe it has to do more with Gary Neville than with his position )

Also though, you could argue that many full-backs, like bale, who excelled at fullback, get moved into advanced positions or centre half, where their talents can be used more effectively.

That also indicates that most managers consider it a lower priority position. I don't think there is a cut and dry rule to it though.

Tomwin Lannister wrote:Yeah it's a lot of work on both ends of the pitch, without the recognition

I imagine anybody with a skill set to play wide prefer to play as a Winger

Sadly as a left footer I know that every young coach and P.E teacher ever automatically sees you as a full back
I was shit as a full back, too slow too big at that age group, crap out wide but nope left foot = play at least 10 games as a full back

This is like lefty code, as one I know the feeling

So, I split of the rounders discussion - please go there for that: http://www.goallegacy.net/t36358-rounders

Here's the FB discussion. ^^

TBH, I feel like we will see less natural FBs and more CBs/Wingers be played there.

It's a lot of work and it doesn't get enough recognition. An interviewer once asked MDS if he preferred playing RB or LB. He said LB, so he can cut inside and shoot.

The Franchise wrote:

Tomwin Lannister wrote:Yeah it's a lot of work on both ends of the pitch, without the recognition

I imagine anybody with a skill set to play wide prefer to play as a Winger

Sadly as a left footer I know that every young coach and P.E teacher ever automatically sees you as a full back
I was shit as a full back, too slow too big at that age group, crap out wide but nope left foot = play at least 10 games as a full back

This is like lefty code, as one I know the feeling

LMFAO, thankfully and luckily I never felt this, but a good friend of mine did. Lets put it lightly and say he wasn't happy.

Great RW who constantly cut inside, found himself at LB

Forced my way to CDM at about year 9-10

I make a point of never doing it to players lol

Both my leftbacks are actually ideal for the position and one of them is even right footed.

I didnt get put as a leftback myself quite as bad as Tomwin. But it was more like, if our normal leftback was out...100% I am getting asked to play there.


But as for the position itself in this discussion. Its a good position to play if you have the attributes for it.

I mean, you get the least defensive attention and nearly every time you receive the ball your already facing the goal. As opposed to every other position (minus CB and GK) where quite often your facing other directions and need to turn.

Also, as a fullback you get alot of leeway with passes. Your against the sideline naturally so everyone knows if you get pressed and cant make a simple pass in the middle, you can basically send it down the line for a 50-50 ball and not get much criticism for it.

If your a midfielder and your sending 50-50s down the sides, your just seen as (rightly) crap.

I played fullback for one half in a match before.
Quite liked it very much!

I played on the wings a lot and I can tell you one thing about fullbacks - they are good lads. I always formed good bonds with the player that played behind me.

My personal experiences are that fullback is the worst position on the pitch and quite logical why it's not popular.

It's f*cking exhausting, you have to defend and attack, up and down. Work rate must be high to be decent in that position. You have to be good at both defending and attacking, good at defending 1v1s and tactically.

It's much easier just being a CB, where you have a defending partner and less running to do.

Wingers are ruining it, they are often lacking workrate/egos ruining it making it hard and boring as f*ck playing fullback.

So what I said, I hate it and I can see why others hate it too. 3 CBs is more fun and less running in amateur football but I can see it transitioning into proffesional if they keep dying (which I hope, more fun imo)

I liked that role  exactly because  it was both defending and attacking and so at the centre of the game, always been a work rate player