Ange Postecoglou is a manager with his own philosophy and style of play. His teams are traditionally aggressive in the press and place a lot of emphasis on attacking football. Within that structure, a lot of importance is given to playing the ball out from the back, along with the speed at which the players move the ball. However, one of the more modern and complex aspects of Ange’s tactical approach is the use of inverted full backs.
Pep Guardiola is the manager most commonly credited with creating the notion of inverted full backs. The idea being that the full backs tuck inside and push into the midfield when the team has possession of the ball. The reasons for this strange tactical innovation are many.
Firstly, by joining the midfield during attacks, the inverted full backs provide cover in the middle of the park, which allows attacking midfielders to enjoy more freedom to push forward. An example of this would be Taylor and Ralston protecting the midfield with Soro, which then allows McGregor to advance with Turnbull and get between the lines, where he/they can cause the opposition problems rather than their talent being wasted in a deeper role.
Another key aspect of this unusual tactic is that when attacks break down, Celtic should theoretically be able to engage in the press quickly with three covering players. E.g. if McGregor were to have a shot blocked at the edge of the penalty area, then Celtic should be able to engage the opposition quickly when the ball breaks into the middle of the park, because they have an extra two players in that part of the pitch and an overload on the opposition.
Another two advantages of this system are in a direct attacking sense, and they are perhaps the most important two factors that underpin this tactic. On the one hand, full backs being high and narrow can mean that there are more options in the midfield, which can create attacking opportunities. A good example of that happening is with Ralston’s goal against Hearts when he picked the ball up in a much more advanced position than his right back role would normally suggest. On the other hand, having one or both of the full backs tucking inside when the centre backs or holding midfielder has the ball means that the wingers should be isolated and able to receive a pass. Put simply, this is because the full back’s inside run should drag the opposition winger with him, thus opening a direct line of pass for the ball to go our own wide men higher up the park. An example of this would be Soro dropping deep to collect the ball from Starfelt, Taylor dragging the opposition winger inside with a run into the middle of the pitch, which then frees up Forrest on the wing to receive the ball to feet.
A breakdown of what inverted full backs are and what they are designed to do is succinctly explained in the video below:
It all sounds very easy and simple on paper, but obviously football is not played on paper and there are many drawbacks to consider too.
Perhaps the biggest draw back is how exposed the central defenders can become. Indeed, having full backs pushed into the midfield can leave the centre backs stretched as they have to cover a larger area. If the full backs do not time their runs forward correctly then the opposition can break, leaving the centre backs to mark any players breaking out wide, whilst also watching opponents in the centre. To combat this, Soro would be required to drop into a centre back role to provide cover, but football doesn’t always work smoothly like that. This became an issue against Hearts when the Jambos seemed to have a man free at the back post on a number of occasions, because Ralston wasn’t in a traditional full back position and the system didn’t work out as planned. Furthermore, the tactic was exposed against Jablonec last night when a stray pass caused Celtic’s attack to break down. One ball over the top to the wide man left Celtic toiling with the player free to run in on goal. Bitton, a centre back, had been involved in the attack and thus there wasn’t sufficient defensive cover in the wide area with Ralston pushed forward as instructed by this inverted full back system. See for yourself by clicking on the image below:
Ange Postecoglou has since stated that mistakes in the midfield caused the goal to be conceded. He is correct in a sense, but that is certainly a drawback to this tactic because it would be highly unusual for players not to give the ball away at some stage in the game. And if the opposition are quick to pounce like they were in the video above, then it leaves the Bhoys vulnerable to a counter attack. Hearts midfielder Andy Halliday spoke about that being part of their game plan against us last week, on the Open Goal podcast. Like him or loathe him, he did highlight something to consider when he said that the Jambos’ plan was to sit deep, but leave three up top to stretch the Celtic back line and isolate Starfelt and Bitton, before capitalising on the counter. He feels that this set up was how they got their first goal against us at Tynecastle, though I’d contend that poor tackling was the greater reason.
You can hear Halliday talk about the tactic below, particularly how it creates a 6 v 2 in the midfield at times!
Another negative of having inverted full backs is that the midfield can become too congested. Whilst creating an overload to dominate the midfield is one of the positives of the idea, it can also be problematic by making everything too tight. The way out is to get the ball to the wingers, who should be isolated, but if they are unable to beat their marker then the ball is either going backwards or returning to that congested centre of the park. This is particularly problematic if the wingers push too high and thus receive the ball with no space in which to work (I spotted this occurring a few times against Hearts), as they will then be too close to their opposite number and have no room to maneuver. Furthermore, if the full back has taken up an inverted position, then it also negates the opportunity for an overlap, unless one of the advanced midfielders has spotted the opportunity and made a run outside. Although, it does open up the chance to create an underlap, which Taylor did to great effect at Tynecastle (one moment that stands out is his underlap and cut back to Turnbull at the edge of the box). So, it’s swings and roundabouts to a certain degree.
All in all, the use of inverted full backs is something that is very new at Celtic so it will take time for the players to get used to. The tactic relies on a number of players responding to triggers at the right time to take full advantage and to prevent the defence from being exposed. It can be done with both full backs advancing at the same time, or one going when the passage of play allows and the other remaining deeper. It all comes down to decisions and knowing what to do at any given moment. This will be mastered in time with Ange’s coaching and more games being played. The tactic suits the manager’s philosophy, encourages an attacking, aggressive pressing style of play and let’s face it… if it’s good enough for Pep Guardiola and Manchester City then it should be good enough for Celtic.
