Systems, Positions, Roles and Spiderman's Move up North

Look at the following names. Same position (on paper at least) in the same formations (once again on paper at least).

• Sergio Busquets and Casemiro

• Trent Alexander-Arnold and Kyle Walker

• Roberto Firmino and Mauro Icardi

If we take a look through the numbers these players have put up in their past few seasons, the differences will be staggering. Why? The answer seems pretty straightforward but that's partly because these players' roles are almost extremes. Busquets anchored for Xavi and Iniesta in his prime but he was a press-resistant pirouetting piece of Pep's puzzle (superb alliteration with all those P's!). Casemiro on the other hand anchored for Kroos and Modric in his own prime but he was the calamity-causing crippling component of Zidane's Champions. That doesn't show Busquets couldn't defend and Casemiro isn't technically gifted. Instead it's 2 different players, playing 2 different roles in 2 different systems BUT in the same position (Lone defensive midfielder) in the same formation (4-3-3). 

So what is the basic difference between roles and positions? 

A position is at the very least the part of the pitch a player is expected to occupy on the pitch. 

A role on the other hand, is what a player is expected to do on or off the ball while in that position.

Easy? If you're a football manager addict like hundreds of thousands of others (myself included) you'll be familiar with roles. Roles are extremely key in a lot of aspects of football, from systems on the pitch to recruitment off it. Roles are primarily informed by a players' skillset i.e what he's good and not so good at. If you have a good finisher in spite of his position, you want to see him occupying areas where he gets a chance to get on the end of chances. Doherty at Wolves is a good example, a right wing back but he scored tap-ins and his shot map would back up how his shooting chances were from inside the box (achieved with underlapping runs... topic for another day). If I'm a good crosser you want me in zones where I can put in a really good delivery. De Bruyne, ideally a central player, gets in position to drill his trademark low cross.

Every position has a variety of roles. Goalkeepers can be traditional (Oblak) or sweepers (Neuer) . Centre backs can be ball players (Van Djik), ball carriers (Maguire) or even the stonefaced bastard (Ramos). Defensive midfielders can be ball winners (Casemiro) deep lying playmakers (Busquets) or registas (Jorginho). Wide players can be inside forwards (Ronaldo), inverted wingers (Salah), traditional wingers (McNeil), ramdeuters (Mueller). Strikers can be target men (Giroud), false nines (Nolito) . Even the usual number 10s can be shadow strikers (Alli) as well as playmakers (James Rodriguez). At the very top level a lot of players have a skillset so complete that they can perform the more than one role at once.

Stats can help understand the difference in a players' roles. Numbers will always differ depending on what players are asked to do. We can look at it in 2 ways to understand the difference in the roles of players

• Same player but in different teams playing different systems but in the same position

• Different players in different teams playing different roles but in the same formation.

Today we'll look particularly at fullbacks. The role of a fullback has grown massively in recent years. They've moved from defensive stalwarts to have more responsibility in the attacking phase. Attacking fullbacks have been around forever; Marcelo, Cafu, Alba, Roberto Carlos, Dani Alves. However, Liverpool's dynamic duo have forced players in their position to be viewed in a very different regard. One of the fullbacks to have come under heavy criticism and constant comparison with Trent Alexander-Arnold is Manchester United's Aaron Wan Bissaka. For all his perceived limitations, he's a completely different player with an almost parallel skillset. Same position? Yes, but their managers ask different things of them in the roles they play.

Aaron Wan Bissaka, Man United's Spiderman. Why AWB? He's a solid right back and there's been a lot of negativity around his game a year on from his move. But here's why, moving from Crystal Palace to Manchester United is a massive step up (just ask Wilf Zaha) but moving from Roy Hodgeson to Ole Gunnar Solskjær is an even more tangible challenge. His asked to do completely different sets of things so while his position remains right back, the role is extremely different. 

What do the numbers say? 

First of all in possession, the difference is quietly notable. 

In Palace he saw far less of the ball and that is evident in his touches taking a significant leap in his first season in Manchester. The Red Devils are a more attack-minded team, where fullbacks are required to affect the game higher up the pitch rather than restrain themselves and win possession back primarily. This is visible in him touching the ball in the opponents' half more often in his time up North. Similarly, he spent more time touching the ball in his own defensive third as an Eagle which is logical considering their set up. Interestingly, he has attempted a similar number of dribbles initially at Palace and United before dropping off so far this season. Why? This is more down to him as an individual not trying to force the issue and beat his man. Neither of his managers have asked that of him either so there's not much in that. Teams under Roy Hodgeson are not known for dominating possession unlike Manchester United. This means Wan Bissaka sees the ball more often in his new club, and as a direct result attempts more passes than he did at Selhurst. With the systems so far apart, it would be perfectly reasonable to question United going for a player who had only played one full season before they paid big money for him. They had simply not seen enough of that side of his game, except in tiny flashes but they gambled and it has worked out fairly. In a low block, Wan-Bissaka was never asked to drive forward with the ball and carry it. For Solskjær's side however, he often carries the ball out of defense on the flanks before moving it on. This explains the huge jump in that after the move.

Next, the attacking performance. His numbers here may stir up some debate.

When it come to direct influence on attacking play and chance creation, the former Palace man's numbers haven't taken a wild jump. This is not to say he is playing the same role at Old Trafford or in the same system, it's more to do with his skillset. He was never the most attack minded fullback in the league.

However, you can still identify he's asked to do a lot more forward thinking when in possession. While his Expected Assists has only marginally increased showing the quality of the chances he's creating are still very low, Wan-Bissaka is playing more passes that lead to shots. Under Solskjær, he's encouraged to move the ball on into the final third for more creative attacking players. His shot creating actions going up are an indication of his new more attack-minded role but very few of those shots lead to actual goals and that's an argument about his quality in directly influencing scorelines.

Last but not least, the very same thing that earned him the nickname "The Spider" ; defensive contributions. At Selhurst Park, the Congo-born Englishman was a major part of their defensive solidity. His one-on-one defending is immaculate and his tackling ability is miles above that of many fullbacks in the game right now. 

The biggest story Wan-Bissaka's numbers in this area tell is just how different the system broadly is under his Norwegian manager. Tackles are his bread and butter and while his numbers have not gone down massively the key difference is where not how many. At Palace in a 5-4-1 or 4-4-2 low or mid block, he was having to regain possession more often from attackers in his own defensive third. Meanwhile, at United with the team being active further up the pitch, more often than not, his tackling is more pronounced in the middle and final thirds. It's a similar story with his pressing. He was actually a more active presser at Palace but a ridiculous amount of those pressures were in his own defensive third. That has changed massively since he moved up north, with the mostly offensive setup in place.

Finally, this is not a conclusion I will draw for anyone but if we stuck to the Football Manager role template (which while helpful is limiting) what type of full back do you think Wan-Bissaka qualified as before and after his €55 million move.

Fullback? Wingback? Complete wingback? Inverted wingback? No-nonsense fullback?

Contact @ footballscribblers@gmail.com for freelance pieces.