A Brief History of Tactics

Thank you so much… This is really shocking for me... wing halves job were marking opposition wingers, so I suspect them becoming full back (wing back) later on … But your video shown me that Bobby Moore becoming left sided overlapping center backs (Which I really don't expect overlapping CB exist back then!) wile Masopust become like box to box midfielder

So I learned that wing halves are much more than just a defensive winger, they are all round player which in modern formation, will fill various role

 

No problem - yes, like msioux was helping to illustrate different countries tended to move to new systems slightly differently, so in Uruguay for example some old wing halves did become the new side back players. @msioux75 and @comme can help with that, but I think Victor Rodriguez Andrade probably made that transition....

I replied a bit quickly earlier but thinking about it more carefully I think Foulkes would have moved from a full back in WM system to a centre back in WM system (that then became 4-2-4) - it was 1960 that he started playing centre back I think wasn't it....

So yeah, me and you have been talking about adjustments from 3-2-2-3 (WM) to 4-2-4 mainly I'd say (but WM-variants were often used in the intermediate period by various teams anyway), but previously wing halves played in 2-3-5 systems and in such systems they were indeed more predominantly wide players although not exactly like fixed wing-backs I don't think - sometimes they might come inside depending on developments in play (in the WM they were more like central DMs).

Some teams, like Austria, played a system with two 'full backs' in the old-fashioned way and an old-fashioned centre-half ahead of them and between two wing halves (Ernst Ocwirk played that role, and when he played instead in a WM he became a 'wing half' and in effect probably played quite similarly to how he did as old-fashioned centre-half - in the game below he is playing as left half in a WM type system with Cajkowski partnering him as a right wing half):
England v Rest of the World October 1953 - YouTube

 

Something that makes things confusing is that reporters from that time, called players from 50s-70s, in Pyramid terminology (Wing Halves, Centrehalf, Full Backs), when those players were playing diferent roles actually, because systems had changed.

There were also, reports from 60s in Pyramid ordering: 1 - 2,3 - 4,5,6 - ..., when that system was outdated 20 years ago.

 

thank you, what about direct transisition between 2-3-5 to 4-2-4 ? Same effect? Wing Halves will later develop as CB, FB, and DM?

 

So actually in 50s, WM and MW system aren't existed anymore? They play more like modern day formation?

 

More likely wing halves would become full backs that way I think (applicable perhaps to Uruguay indeed I'm thinking; maybe Austria also although I think Gerhard Hanappi for example might have played mostly as a midfielder having been formerly a wing half I guess, albeit he is left back indeed in that game vs England from 1953, playing for the Rest of the World(/Europe); Ernst Happel I think was a 'left full back' (with two wing halves ahead/to the side of him and Ocwirk between them in the middle in a DM/CM centre half role) and became a centre back anyway when Austria did belatedly change systems (I believe anyway, if I'm not mistaken).

Some nations did things (and numbered things) a bit differently during progression between eras/systems anyway (and clubs within nations). Hungary for example had a back 3 in the WM era that was numbered 2-3-4 (with 5 and 6 as wing halves, that had become CMs, but one was closer to a centre back and one an anchor midfielder/deep-lying playmaker that was also a bit box to box) and they also introduced a 'deep lying centre forward' (maybe you know this) wearing number 9 and then the inside forwards 8 and 10 became akin to a more modern striker partnership a little bit.

 

Sorry, if I'm not explained to me well.

The evolution by eras was:
Pyramid / 2-3-5: mid 1880s ---> mid 1940s
WM / 3-2-5: early 1940s ---> early 1960s
4-2-4: 1960s
4-3-3: late 1960s ---> early 1980s
...
In this general trend, there were exceptions, like Uruguay/Austria playing 2-3-5 until mid 50s. Or british teams, using WM since mid 1930s, etc.

For example, Czechoslovakia played WM (late 40s - early 60s), Masopust as one of the two midfielders, played as Left Half, in opposition to previous system, in which I think, he didn't played.

 

I'm sorry, I'm bit confused here.

Gerhard Hanappi were used to be wing half, then being midfielder after then.. What midfielder? Central midfielder in 4-2-4?

Ernst Happel is used to be FB behind the wing halves, then later become CB right?

 

I see.. Thank you

from what you see, what position did most player that used to be wing halves later converted to, when team start to abandon 2-3-5 for 4-2-4 in 60s ?

 

I'm not really an expert on Hanappi's career but I think central (box to box) midfielder after his teams adopted new formations probably yes, albeit he was a 'utility' player that sometimes played as left back and right back, sometimes as playmaking midfielder or supporting forward etc I think.
This comment is maybe helpful
"A graduate of the so-called 'Vienna football school' - a style of play which focussed on creativity and technique - Hanappi's stamina, pace, dribbling skills and vision saw him employed as a midfield player, a right-back and most successfully as a deep-lying striker"
Hanappi's gift to posterity | Inside UEFA | UEFA.com

Yes, that's right about Happel I think. Maybe he even played like a bit of a sweeper at some point I think in his later career.

 

that's so cool, thanks ! I can now imagine classic wing halves is more like Javier Zanetti rather than pure defensive-minded fullbacks

 

I post something few hours back, it seems disappear.. maybe it's in moderation lol

anyway, I just finish watching 2 old full match footage, one is FA cup final 1958 between man utd and bolton, while the other is FA cup final 1957 between aston villa and man utd

I notice there are some things amiss
Man utd player got injured (Goalkeeper), no substitution allowed, so they played with 10 men.

In modern day, usually one of the forward will be replaced with more defensive player when team play with 10 men. But in this game, instead of taking forward, man utd were taking their wing half instead (jackie blanchflower if I remember it correctly)

is this common for these days? When play with 10 men, compensate with sacrifying midfielder instead of forwards?

Then late on, that injured guy comeback, but as right-winger ! Which confuse me even more. So 6 striker formation?? 2-3-5 become 2-2-6?

The other were about set pieces, but I'm gonna ask about it later.

 

I guess, one of the Forwards was an Utility player, and turned into a Half, when playing with 10 men.

It was usual those times, that an injury player, had been moved to a Winger.

 

Remember, WM exist in between.

235: Wing Halves = playing close to the sides

WM in Europe: Just "Halves" both playing centrally
WM in América: one of them turned into Lateral

Back 4: Remaining Half turned into 2nd Centerback

 

I'm not sure whether the Austrian formation stated on the page should be trusted (the England one is not really correct I think, just because they laid it out in the old-fashioned 2-3-5 but in reality it would surely have been WM - that is a constant thing though on that site anyway), but as it is specifically called the Ocwirk formation maybe it is correct for that game and maybe it would be a rare case of a direct transition from 2-3-5 to 4-2-4 if that was right (but I understood 4-2-4 to be a later formation, so probably Austria didn't really play it as we later knew it?)
England Match No. 268 - Austria - 28 November 1951 - Match Summary and Report (englandfootballonline.com)
Zeman -
Hanappi, Röckl, Happel, Brinek -
Huber, Ocwirk -
Melchior, Gernhardt, Stojaspal, Körner
For this next game between Austria and England the Austrian team is shown in a 2-3-5 system though (and more likely correct for them I guess)
England Match No. 271 - Austria - 25 May 1952 - Match Summary and Report (englandfootballonline.com)
Musil -
Röckl, Happel -
Schleger, Ocwirk, Brinek -
Melchior, Hanappi, Dienst, Huber, Haummer

The question is possibly whether in the 1951 game Hanappi and Brinek were actually playing as wing halves or true full backs, as well as what Huber's role really was....

 

I see. so those team are just simmilar with modern ones, converting forward onto more defensive position when played with 10 men

since the injured moved to a winger, will that be easy task for fullbacks? reducing crosses from that sides?

 

I see.. So wing half actually have center midfield attributes, that's why they are comfortable to play centrally (3-2-5) or even being center half as the midfielder are center halfback then

 

In Britain at least there were no wing-halves after 1945, although the media sometimes referred to them in error.

Around the turn of the twentieth century it was believed that the three half-backs were the most important members of the team. They could stop opponents' attacks and start those of their own side. All half-backs then (right-half, left-half, centre-half) could tackle. That was their main job. The better ones could do other things too.

After the 1925 change in offside law, gradually in Britain the old pyramid system (2-3-5) evolved into WM (3-2-2-3). The centre-half was now the deepest defender, responsible for organising the offside trap. With 2-3-5 that job had fallen to the centrally-positioned full-backs. Under WM they spread out wider and marked opposing wingers, a task that used to be handled by the right and left halves (wing-halves). These players now had a more central role, but their main task was still tackling.

As the WM system developed, it was common for either the right or left half to concentrate mainly on defensive work while his partner provided more support to the forwards. Both still had to be good tacklers. The WM system continued more or less in British club football until the end of the 1960s.

English national team manager Alf Ramsey moved away from WM earlier because he believed that wingers were a luxury against the strongest international opponents. His left-half, Bobby Moore, moved into a nominal back four, with license to advance into midfield. The right-half, Nobby Stiles, was an old-fashioned man-marker who followed the opposition's most dangerous player. The main strength of both men was still tackling, although Moore had an additional creative role in a team short of creativity.

The system was something like 4-1-3-2 when England were defending. When they went forward it was similar to the WM the men played for their clubs.

Since then the old right or left half has moved into a back four, usually central, while the other has been the deepest midfielder. Or they have both been holding midfielders in front of a back three.

This is all a bit simplistic but in essence both players still have to be good tacklers, or interceptors, with the best expected to have additional attributes.

 

I'm guessing, managers thought that defenders + halves were necessary,all 5 of them.
In attack, the 9 and both insiders, were more focused at scoring, meanwhile Outside Forwards were more providers (maybe the less necessary upfront).
Also, rival defenders at those times were focusing only in defending. I mean, there was no attacking full back.

 

A famous example I guess (in the 1960s though) is Pele playing left wing after being injured vs Portugal:
1966 Pelé vs Portugal - WORLD CUP - YouTube
Portugal vs Brazil live score, H2H and lineups | Sofascore

 

I see. What about defensive aspect? Won't an injured guy is easy to defend against?

Also about no 9, in modern football, many tall target man will be asked to go for far post, switching position with Attacking midfielder or Forward partner, to challenge shorter full-backs

in classic eras, do the no 9 also switch position with IF or Winger to challenge opposition Fullbacks/Wing halves in the far post?

 

thank you, very strange to see right footed player being left winger those days!

 

Hey everyone, how are you?

As an amateur football researcher, I had struggled to find complete tactical formations for teams in matches from the 1930s to the 1960s, particularly in the World Cup. While we're aware of common formations like 2-3-5 and WM, I know there were exceptions and variations.

Do you know of any books or websites that attempt to reconstruct these formations, especially for World Cup matches?

Thanks a lot.

 

Thanks for the help. I'm just passing through some pages right now, and the work is incredible. Do you have any references for works about the Champions League and major European tournaments (UEFA Cup, Cup Winners Cup) in the same vein? Cheers.