[kiristao]

I thought he was good defensively but did make a few wayward passes in bad positions yesterday which thankfully didn't cost us.
Was one of his better games going forward I thought. Put in a few good balls but we didn't have a proper CF in the line who could tap them in.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

He's terrific defensively. His first performance though where his passing was poor. It would help for us to have a midfield and right wing, especially someone better than Periera at right side of CM.

 

[varga92]

He is the king of the tackles.

"Aaron Wan-Bissaka has made more challenges (7) than the rest of the Manchester United Team Together (4).

No other Manchester United defender made a successful tackle."

However, he needs to improve with the ball.

"He lost possession 30 times (7 more than anybody on the pitch)"

 

[Treble]

He is the king of the tackles.

"Aaron Wan-Bissaka has made more challenges (7) than the rest of the Manchester United Team Together (4).

No other Manchester United defender made a successful tackle."

However, he needs to improve with the ball.

"He lost possession 30 times (7 more than anybody on the pitch)"

Tackles were the rage 10-15 years ago.

 

[Brwned]

Tackles were the rage 10-15 years ago.

I'd be amazed if you can find a team in history that doesn't have a great tackler playing a prominent role in their team. The desire to re-paint modern football as a completely different sport is laughable IMO.

 

[Lash]

We all knew he needed to improve going forward. He’s got the whole season to do that.

First and foremost we now know his defending wasn’t due to the set up he was in, it was all him. Glorious defender. Would be good if we actually had right sided attacker he could play off or learn from, though.

 

[Treble]

I'd be amazed if you can find a team in history that doesn't have a great tackler playing a prominent role in their team. The desire to re-paint modern football as a completely different sport is laughable IMO.

Well, there was a thread on here several months ago which showed how football has changed over the last decade. The number of tackles has been steadily declining. If you have more possession and control, play from the back etc. you don't need to do much tackling. Fullbacks nowadays are not famous for their tackling ability.

 

[#07]

Besides Dan James there wasn't much to be positive about after the Southampton match, Wan-Bissaka was one of those few positives. Whipped in a lot of dangerous balls that nobody attacked. Solskjaer in his heyday, with his instincts in the six yard box, would have got a hat trick off the crosses that Wan-Bissaka and James put in today. When you add that to Wan-Bissaka's defensive contribution its really impressive what he's doing at the moment.

 

[Brwned]

Well, there was a thread on here several months ago which showed how football has changed over the last decade. The number of tackles has been steadily declining. If you have more possession and control, play from the back etc. you don't need to do much tackling. Fullbacks nowadays are not famous for their tackling ability.

Changed in small and subtle ways? Sure. Irreversibly evolved into a better version of itself? You'd need a lot more than that. We've seen lots of trends in football. Very few of them were permanent. Possession dominance came in and out of fashion, defensive football came in and out of fashion...multiple times. You know this yourself.

Anyway, can you point to a great team that didn't have a great tackler playing a prominent role?

 

[Treble]

Changed in small and subtle ways? Sure. Irreversibly evolved into a better version of itself? You'd need a lot more than that. We've seen lots of trends in football. Very few of them were permanent. Possession dominance came in and out of fashion, defensive football came in and out of fashion...multiple times. You know this yourself.

Anyway, can you point to a great team that didn't have a great tackler playing a prominent role?

We are talking about a fullback here. None of City's and Liverpool's fullbacks is a great tackler. Who was the great tackler at Barca in their best period? Busquets? And why is AWB supposed to have a prominent role? How is his role different from that of the other defenders?

Football is evolving, yes. Ole isn't the one who will introduce the next changes though. You need to watch how small teams all over the world play from the back and cherish possession to see how much football has changed over the last decade. Tackling is not supposed to be the main strength of any top player now, even someone like Fernandinho who is an excellent passer of the ball and has a great sense of positioning.

 

[Hughes35]

He will be our player of the year I think (Don't think there will be much competition).

His tackling is superb. His crossing really isn't bad. Still think he can improve on his attacking movement and pass selection but hopefully that comes in time.

 

[andersj]

Sloppy passing in the first half and should have done better on their goal. Besides from that, he was good.

 

[Volumiza]

A few sloppy passes aside another good game from AWB. I really like this guy a lot ... still really young too. Potentially fantastic player for years to come.

 

[ivaldo]

We are talking about a fullback here. None of City's and Liverpool's fullbacks is a great tackler. Who was the great tackler at Barca in their best period? Busquets? And why is AWB supposed to have a prominent role? How is his role different from that of the other defenders?

Football is evolving, yes. Ole isn't the one who will introduce the next changes though. You need to watch how small teams all over the world play from the back and cherish possession to see how much football has changed over the last decade. Tackling is not supposed to be the main strength of any top player now, even someone like Fernandinho who is an excellent passer of the ball and has a great sense of positioning.

So having a fullback capable of doing something even the fullbacks at top teams are incapable of doing is somehow a bad thing now?

He isn't being forced to make unnecessarily large amounts of challenges; what we are seeing is a player winning the ball back when he really has no right to. What we are seeing is opposition teams having to move key players out of position because they're getting absolutely no change out of him. That's a good thing.

Quite the opposite. Having the capability of winning the ball back quickly is becoming increasingly important. As you've said teams are becoming better at keeping the ball now, so having a player who can singlehandedly turnover possession is a rarity and something that should be cherished, not criticized.

 

[Treble]

So having a fullback capable of doing something even the fullbacks at top teams are incapable of doing is somehow a bad thing now?

He isn't being forced to make unnecessarily large amounts of challenges; what we are seeing is a player winning the ball back when he really has no right to. What we are seeing is opposition teams having to move key players out of position because they're getting absolutely no change out of him. That's a good thing.

Quite the opposite. Having the capability of winning the ball back quickly is becoming increasingly important. As you've said teams are becoming better at keeping the ball now, so having a player who can singlehandedly turnover possession is a rarity and something that should be cherished, not criticized.

You haven't understood my point.

 

[settembrini]

I think he's been fantastic so far.

However as someone who was very keen for us to buy him in the summer I always said we should be signing a right winger to play ahead of him. The plan should have been to use Wan-Bissaka to shut down teams attacking from that side and let the new attacker have free reign going forwards without having to be worried about tracking back and helping out in defence. For example our 07/08 PL + CL winning team where Brown did all the defending and Ronaldo was free to attack and score 42 goals.

Instead we signed yet another winger who has is better on the left and we are stuck hoping that Wan-Bissaka can significantly improve his attacking to give us more of a threat from the right side. While I am positive overall about our signings in this summer this was a clear mistake.

 

[Bestietom]

I thought he was good defensively but did make a few wayward passes in bad positions yesterday which thankfully didn't cost us.
Was one of his better games going forward I thought. Put in a few good balls but we didn't have a proper CF in the line who could tap them in.

He and James put in some lovely crosses but we had no one to finish them off. We need a prolific CF in the next transfer window.

 

[ivaldo]

You haven't understood my point.

I have, I've just pointed out the backward thinking in which has brought you to your conclusion.

 

[Treble]

I have, I've just pointed out the backward thinking in which has brought you to your conclusion.

Backward thinking OK.

 

[ivaldo]

Backward thinking OK.

Glad you agree.

 

[Brwned]

We are talking about a fullback here. None of City's and Liverpool's fullbacks is a great tackler. Who was the great tackler at Barca in their best period? Busquets? And why is AWB supposed to have a prominent role? How is his role different from that of the other defenders?

Football is evolving, yes. Ole isn't the one who will introduce the next changes though. You need to watch how small teams all over the world play from the back and cherish possession to see how much football has changed over the last decade. Tackling is not supposed to be the main strength of any top player now, even someone like Fernandinho who is an excellent passer of the ball and has a great sense of positioning.

It doesn't matter what your best strength is if you're also good at other things. Loads of great players were great tacklers. Many great fullbacks were exceptional tacklers and made it a pivotal point in their game. If you believe Berti Vogts would be redundant in the modern game then I don't know what to say.

You've jumped around a lot there. Are we only talking about fullbacks or are we talking about Busquets? Are we talking about prominent players or supporting players? Trying so hard to avoid answering the question makes for a pretty silly waste of time on both sides, I think.

Serie A in the 80s was the model for great football. And now it isn't. But inevitably an evolved form of it will come about again, in the same way it was an evolved form of Catenaccio in the 60s. And in between times you had Cruyff and Beckenbauer defining European football, with a slightly different style of play. Somehow none of those era defining styles stuck, but this one is the one? Ffs I'll leave you to it you football visionary

 

[Treble]

It doesn't matter what your best strength is if you're also good at other things. Loads of great players were great tacklers. Many great fullbacks were exceptional tacklers and made it a pivotal point in their game. If you believe Berti Vogts would be redundant in the modern game then I don't know what to say.

You've jumped around a lot there. Are we only talking about fullbacks or are we talking about Busquets? Are we talking about prominent players or supporting players? Trying so hard to avoid answering the question makes for a pretty silly waste of time on both sides, I think.

Serie A in the 80s was the model for great football. And now it isn't. But inevitably an evolved form of it will come about again, in the same way it was an evolved form of Catenaccio in the 60s. And in between times you had Cruyff and Beckenbauer defining European football, with a slightly different style of play. Somehow none of those era defining styles stuck, but this one is the one? Ffs I'll leave you to it you football visionary

My point is very simple: being good at tackling constituted a much bigger part of being a top fullback a decade ago than it is now because football has changed. I never wrote and implied that this is the final form football can and will take. Indeed, I agreed with the common-sense observation that football evolves which implies that it will continue to change tactically wise. However, here and now, title-winning teams have fullbacks whose ability to tackle isn't a big part of their overall ability. Which answers your question insofar as it makes sense at all. In 5 or 10 years the main quality of fullbacks might be to be good at tackling, but not now. And I doubt Ole is the one who will reinvent football so that passing, keeping possession, contributing to attack won't be particularly important for fullbacks.

Your question doesn't make much sense because it is extremely general: is there a team without a great tackler, no matter where the tackler plays: CB, FB, DM, CM...? The top teams employ a player who is great at tackling mostly at DM (Casemiro, Fernandinho, Fabinho...) because he is supposed to be a destroyer. But nobody of them excells mostly at tackling. Any of them contributes a lot in the attacking phase of the game. And this is even more true of fullbacks nowadays. Guardiolla wanted to replace Fernandinho who is probably City's only player who can be categorised as a great tackler, with Jorginho who is shit at it. Which reveals much about his reasoning.

Right now AWB is excellent at tackling but this is not what constitutes a top fullback in current football. He is very young though and will probably develop into a fine player in both phases of the game.

 

[red woppit]

He's looking good despite being still a quite inexperienced player. He has a natural ability to tackle, his positioning and awareness can get better, as can his overlapping and attacking play, but I think we have a gem on our hands. Is probably a very good player in a back three.

 

[A-man]

My point is very simple: being good at tackling constituted a much bigger part of being a top fullback a decade ago than it is now because football has changed. I never wrote and implied that this is the final form football can and will take. Indeed, I agreed with the common-sense observation that football evolves which implies that it will continue to change tactically wise. However, here and now, title-winning teams have fullbacks whose ability to tackle isn't a big part of their overall ability. Which answers your question insofar as it makes sense at all. In 5 or 10 years the main quality of fullbacks might be to be good at tackling, but not now. And I doubt Ole is the one who will reinvent football so that passing, keeping possession, contributing to attack won't be particularly important for fullbacks.

.

There are plenty of fullbacks who are on the same level or better who dont rely on tackles to shut down a winger. Instead they use other strengths as good positioning, reading the game, staying close, interceptions etc. I am fully confident that Jordi Alba could shut down a Southampton winger without having to do 9 tackles. But tackles are Bissaka's strength and why not use that skill?

 

[Brwned]

My point is very simple: being good at tackling constituted a much bigger part of being a top fullback a decade ago than it is now because football has changed. I never wrote and implied that this is the final form football can and will take. Indeed, I agreed with the common-sense observation that football evolves which implies that it will continue to change tactically wise. However, here and now, title-winning teams have fullbacks whose ability to tackle isn't a big part of their overall ability. Which answers your question insofar as it makes sense at all. In 5 or 10 years the main quality of fullbacks might be to be good at tackling, but not now. And I doubt Ole is the one who will reinvent football so that passing, keeping possession, contributing to attack won't be particularly important for fullbacks.

Your question doesn't make much sense because it is extremely general: is there a team without a great tackler, no matter where the tackler plays: CB, FB, DM, CM...? The top teams employ a player who is great at tackling mostly at DM (Casemiro, Fernandinho, Fabinho...) because he is supposed to be a destroyer. But nobody of them excells mostly at tackling. Any of them contributes a lot in the attacking phase of the game. And this is even more true of fullbacks nowadays. Guardiolla wanted to replace Fernandinho who is probably City's only player who can be categorised as a great tackler, with Jorginho who is shit at it. Which reveals much about his reasoning.

Right now AWB is excellent at tackling but this is not what constitutes a top fullback in current football. He is very young though and will probably develop into a fine player in both phases of the game.

What makes a good player good isn't defined by trends it's defined by football's fundamentals, which have barely changed in half a century. If AWB can be the next Berti Vogts he'll be wholly out of sync with modern trends for a fullback, while also being an elite player. You can only believe that's impossible if you choose to ignore history or believe football is in a unique period.

On the broader point, you've created a false dichotomy. You don't need to reinvent the game to be successful playing an alternative style. Mourinho's Inter didn't play the dominant style of the day, nor did they reinvent football, they just did their thing and won the treble. Sounds pretty crazy, if you ignore all past historical evidence and base your perception of football on about 3 teams and 1 person over the last few years.

 

[Treble]

There are plenty of fullbacks who are on the same level or better who dont rely on tackles to shut down a winger. Instead they use other strengths as good positioning, reading the game, staying close, interceptions etc. I am fully confident that Jordi Alba could shut down a Southampton winger without having to do 9 tackles. But tackles are Bissaka's strength and why not use that skill?

Indeed. Those players can do much more than just shutting down opposition players and it is this that makes them top players.

 

[Treble]

What makes a good player good isn't defined by trends it's defined by football's fundamentals, which have barely changed in half a century. You don't need to reinvent the game to be successful playing an alternative style. Mourinho's Inter didn't play the dominant style of the day, nor did they reinvent football, they just did their thing and won the treble. Sounds pretty crazy, at least if you ignore all past historical evidence and base your perception of football on about 3 teams and 1 person over the last few years.

If AWB can be the next Berti Vogts he'll be wholly out of sync with modern trends for a fullback, while also being an elite player. You can only believe that's impossible if you choose to ignore history or believe football is in a unique period.

Football has changed for a reason though, not simply because of a fashion trend. And the reason is that defensive players good on the ball contribute more to attack but also to being press-resistant which is very important today. So, a defensive player who is excellent at tackling but not very good at keeping possession and contributing to attack is not a top player in the context of the modern game. What worked for Jose a decade ago doesn't work very well now. He wasted 300 m on players without really improving the team. His United team lacked style and identity. Because his tactical views are dated, unlike those of Klopp who achieved much more with Liverpool with comparable spending.

I

 

[Brwned]

Football has changed for a reason though, not simply because of a fashion trend. And the reason is that defensive players good on the ball contribute more to attack but also to being press-resistant which is very important today. So, a defensive player who is excellent at tackling but not very good at keeping possession and contributing to attack is not a top player in the context of the modern game. What worked for Jose a decade ago doesn't work very well now. He wasted 300 m on players without really improving the team. His United team lacked style and identity. Because his tactical views are dated, unlike those of Klopp who achieved much more with Liverpool with comparable spending.

I

Mourinho had many problems, one of which was tactical. It's like nothing else exists in your perception of modern football but tiki-taka and gegenpressing. I don't know how you line that up with Madrid winning 3 CLs in a row while being a considerably worse possession side than multiple teams, or conversely with Guardiola winning 0 CLs in over half a decade despite having consistently the best possession side. Or Mourinho winning the title in 16/17 with the 6th best possession side in the league, worse than that United team that finished 6th. Or the various other examples that somehow are entirely non-existent in your description of modern football.

Football trends generally happen because of the actions of prominent individuals in largely random moments combined with the same factors that drive fashion trends. And the occasional significant rule change on top. Hence why the great players of today look a lot like the great players of yesteryear. They play different roles because of the tactical trends, but the skills they offered and the way they were evaluated are nearly identical to now. Your judgement is closer to how trendy a player is than how good he is. They've never been the same thing.

Attacking fullbacks were very trendy in the early 70s. Carlos Alberto, Krol, Facchetti, Breitner, etc - contenders for the best of all-time in their positions still today, and idols in their positions at the time. And the style of play that Beckenbauer and Cruyff's teams symbolised was a world apart from what Berti Vogts symbolised. Yet he was able to establish himself as one of the best defenders of all-time in one of those teams, about a decade before his style of football became trendy with 80s Juve / Italy and co. It is evidently possible to go against the grain and succeed, at every level, without it being some kind of revolution. Teams, managers and players do not need to adopt modern trends to be successful - the evidence is straightforward on that. You might think they should, but you certainly can't say they need to.

 

[Treble]

Mourinho had many problems, one of which was tactical. It's like nothing else exists in your perception of modern football but tiki-taka and gegenpressing. I don't know how you line that up with Madrid winning 3 CLs in a row while being a considerably worse possession side than multiple teams, or conversely with Guardiola winning 0 CLs in over half a decade despite having consistently the best possession side. Or Mourinho winning the title in 16/17 with the 6th best possession side in the league, worse than that United team that finished 6th. Or the various other examples that somehow are entirely non-existent in your description of modern football.

Football trends generally happen because of the actions of prominent individuals in largely random moments combined with the same factors that drive fashion trends. And the occasional significant rule change on top. Hence why the great players of today look a lot like the great players of yesteryear. They play different roles because of the tactical trends, but the skills they offered and the way they were evaluated are nearly identical to now. Your judgement is closer to how trendy a player is than how good he is. They've never been the same thing.

I disagree that changes in football are random, they happen because they work. Today players cover 10 km per game which is double what they did 50 years ago. Running and pressing work. Same with possession based football. Guardiola won 198 pts over two seasons in England which is the best tally over two seasons in any European league. It works. Jose won the league in 2015, not 2017. That was before Guardiola and Klopp changed the league. Real are a bad example, their fullbacks are nothing like AWB, they support what I'm saying. Football evolves, but not randomly. One tactics solves problems that another tactics cannot, then yet another tactics better solves problems than the previous, etc. There might be cycles, but new defensive or attacking tactics never are a mere repetition of what was the case earlier.

 

[Lee565]

Not impressed, would have rather had trippier who can actually whip in crosses and good going forward, bissaka is good defensively but we ain't palace ffs, I find it bizarre that Solskjear keeps bleeping on about the United way but signs a defensive fullback? The only way this could truly pay off is if he can be transformed into a centre back whether that be in a 3 at the back or a 2 because I just dont see him at right back working long term if we want a top side again, I cant think of any fullback that was rubbish on the ball and then becoming good where as it is easier to teach a good attacker to become good at defending like we saw with valencia and young.

 

[Brwned]

I disagree that changes in football are random, they happen because they work. Today players cover 10 km per game which is double what they did 50 years ago. Running and pressing work. Same with possession based football. Guardiola won 198 pts over two seasons in England which is the best tally over two seasons in any European league. It works. Jose won the league in 2015, not 2017. That was before Guardiola and Klopp changed the league. Real are a bad example, their fullbacks are nothing like AWB, they support what I'm saying. Football evolves, but not randomly. One tactics solve problems that another tactics cannot, then yet another tactics solve better problems than the previous, etc. There might be cycles, but new defensive or attacking tactics never are a mere repetition of what was the case earlier.

Mourinho, Conte, all the same right? And before that Leicester did so, playing an altogether different kind of football. But I know once you get all the way back to 2016, you're basically talking about an entirely different world, so we can ignore that one.

So in this 3-year era defined by possession football, the best possession teams have consistently lost the biggest tournament in Europe. In the CL last year Man City were #1 with an average of 60% possession, Spurs were the 12th best possession team with 51%, and the eventual winners had 50%. Similar story the year before, with City's 63% possession vs. Liverpool's 50% possession (this time in 14th place), and Madrid as the winners halfway between them with 56%. The year before that it was Guardiola's Bayern on top, and Madrid having even less possession. It's weird how you can only play one way to be successful, and yet the teams playing that way haven't been that successful.

Maybe there's a flaw in your perception of what defines modern football, and the requirements it imposes on players? Maybe Madrid can play a very different style of football and still win things. And so maybe the same broad principle applies to Wan-Bissaka, too? Maybe he doesn't need to play like Guardiola's fullbacks or Zidane's fullbacks. Maybe there's room for a variety of styles, even whilst football moves in particular direction. I think if you look back through the history books, you'll at least find a solid maybe in there.

 

[A-man]

Indeed. Those players can do much more than just shutting down opposition players and it is this that makes them top players.

That is definitely true. Now I was just referring to the defensive skills but the best contribute massively in all parts of the game. I just read that Kimmich had 9 goals and 32 assists in about 90 matches in the FB position.

 

[Mcking]

There are plenty of fullbacks who are on the same level or better who dont rely on tackles to shut down a winger. Instead they use other strengths as good positioning, reading the game, staying close, interceptions etc. I am fully confident that Jordi Alba could shut down a Southampton winger without having to do 9 tackles. But tackles are Bissaka's strength and why not use that skill?

Probably not as well as AWB did as he'd be up against Sofiane Boufal. AWB's tackling is his biggest strength, and that makes him one of the best defensive FB's around, something Alba is not.

 

[Treble]

Mourinho, Conte, all the same right? And before that Leicester did so, playing an altogether different kind of football. But I know once you get all the way back to 2016, you're basically talking about an entirely different world, so we can ignore that one.

So in this 3-year era defined by possession football, the best possession teams have consistently lost the biggest tournament in Europe. In the CL last year Man City were #1 with an average of 60% possession, Spurs were the 12th best possession team with 51%, and the eventual winners had 50%. Similar story the year before, with City's 63% possession vs. Liverpool's 50% possession (this time in 14th place), and Madrid as the winners halfway between them with 56%. The year before that it was Guardiola's Bayern on top, and Madrid having even less possession. It's weird how you can only play one way to be successful, and yet the teams playing that way haven't been that successful.

Maybe there's a flaw in your perception of what defines modern football, and the requirements it imposes on players? Maybe Madrid can play a very different style of football and still win things. And so maybe the same broad principle applies to Wan-Bissaka, too? Maybe he doesn't need to play like Guardiola's fullbacks or Zidane's fullbacks. Maybe there's room for a variety of styles, even whilst football moves in particular direction. I think if you look back through the history books, you'll at least find a solid maybe in there.

You are constantly ascribing to me points I did not made.

I didn't say that there is only one successful tactics, especially to win the CL. I said that tactical approaches do not evolve randomly but get widespread because they work. Tactics which work today require from fullbacks skills in possession and attacking. Possession based football works: it has won CL titles and has broken records in domestic leagues. 56% (Real) is a lot of possession against the best teams in Europe. Did I write above that ONLY posession-based football can win (CL) titles?

You prefer to concentrate entirely on the CL. Note that none of the top teams in the last seasons was happy to concede possesion and be dominated. Note also that this is the CL, you can't have 70% possession. City had on average 68 % possession last season in the PL, they can't have the same percentage in the CL. Their percentage is still too high and it can be explained with the quality of the opposition: weak groups and weak opposition in the last 16. Note that Spurs had 51% despite playing the likes of Barca, Dortmund, City, Ajax and Liverpool! They must be quite good at keeping possession to finish the tournament on 51%.

Note also that City's or Bayern's losses in the CL had little to do with possession. Muller and Aguero score those pens against respectively Atleti and Spurs and both teams would have probably went further in the competition. The thing with the CL is that chance and referee mistakes play a bigger role than in a league because there are only 6-7 more difficult games. Spurs were far from the 2nd best team in Europe last season. Same with Liverpool in 2005 and Chelsea in 2012.

Note also that any of these top teams in the CL enjoys a lot of possession in their domestic leagues. Liverpool had last season a higher percentage than United ever had under Fergie. It works.

Which of these top teams, which, as such, use tactics that works, relies on fullbacks whose main quality is to tackle and are average at keeping possession and going forward? Examples? Even Atleti (of all teams!) signed a RB whose main ability is contributing to attacks.

 

[A-man]

Probably not as well as AWB did as he'd be up against Sofiane Boufal. AWB's tackling is his biggest strength, and that makes him one of the best defensive FB's around, something Alba is not.

My point was that Bissaka's huge amount of tackles is one way of playing, but they are not necessary. Almost all other FBs who are at his level or better (from defence pov) use on average 1-2 tackles per match. Instead they use other skills that Bissaka lack.

 

[Mcking]

My point was that Bissaka's huge amount of tackles is one way of playing, but they are not necessary. Almost all other FBs who are at his level or better (from defence pov) use on average 1-2 tackles per match. Instead they use other skills that Bissaka lack.

I don't think there are many fullbacks in Europe that are better than Wan-Bissaka from a defence POV. Can you think of any?

 

[George Owen]

My point was that Bissaka's huge amount of tackles is one way of playing, but they are not necessary. Almost all other FBs who are at his level or better (from defence pov) use on average 1-2 tackles per match. Instead they use other skills that Bissaka lack.

All those FB play for much better teams, functional teams, so it's not really comparable. Our midfield is non existent so AWB is under pressure and on his own most of the time. I don't think an old Jordy Alba would be a success playing with us.

 

[A-man]

I don't think there are many fullbacks in Europe that are better than Wan-Bissaka from a defence POV. Can you think of any?

I haven't really considered him to be among the best but 1-1 he is extremely good. When we talk about more complex things like cooperation, communication, reading the game, cover for other players, what to do when attackers change positions etc , I think he has a lot to learn. But he is very good for his age and will develop in to something really great.

But my point was that 9 tackles are not necessary to shut down a Southampton winger, but it is Bissakas way of playing so why change something that works very well for him?

 

[A-man]

All those FB play for much better teams, functional teams, so it's not really comparable. Our midfield is non existent so AWB is under pressure and on his own most of the time. I don't think an old Jordy Alba would be a success playing with us.

That is definitely true and also a reason why they don't need to do so much defensive work, and instead can focus on the attack. All the best teams in the world have fullbacks who have huge amounts of assists.

 

[Mcking]

I haven't really considered him to be among the best but 1-1 he is extremely good. When we talk about more complex things like cooperation, communication, reading the game, cover for other players, what to do when attackers change positions etc , I think he has a lot to learn. But he is very good for his age and will develop in to something really great.

But my point was that 9 tackles are not necessary to shut down a Southampton winger, but it is Bissakas way of playing so why change something that works very well for him?

I understand what you are trying to say. He made 9 tackles against Saints which is a lot, but you've to note that 9 tackles isn't the norm for him. Last season, his average of 4 attempted per game was bettered by 7 other FBs that played more than 10 league games, and 30 fullbacks that played over 10 games attempted over 3 tackles per game, and that includes the popular names. Every other fullback tackles just like he does, but his accuracy is the reason why he is arguably the best in the business 1-on-1. Every fullback has to take on the winger, and his ability to win the ball consistently is what sets him apart from most. Another fullback - e.g Jordi Alba could have been able to get the job done, but he probably wouldn't have fared as well considering the amount of one-on-ones Wan-Bissaka faced with little cover against someone like Sofiane Boufal. What I'm saying in essence is that he tackled 9 times because he needed to and is able to, not because he wanted to. Another day, he attempts four.