Norwich City fans are beginning to get to grips with their side’s new tactical identity under Johannes Hoff Thorup.
Ben is a City season ticket holder and author of the NCFC Analysis social media account, who unpicks games with an analytical report highlighting tactical strengths and weaknesses.
Ahead of the Canaries' return to league action at Stoke City this week, Ben has focused on the full back areas of the Dane's tactical masterplan.
Full-backs: From overlaps to inversions
The shift to a more possession-based approach has been, for the most part, well received. It’s a shift in approach that becomes clear when we take a look at the data.
But one of the main talking points has been the role of City’s full-backs in Thorup’s game model. This discussion is partially driven by the contrast between the Dane’s approach and that of his predecessors.
Despite differing styles of play, Daniel Farke and David Wagner were known for their use of high and wide full-backs in settled phases of possession. Both coaches used the full-backs to provide the width, allowing the wingers to invert.
After lining up in a 4-2-3-1 base formation, Farke’s Norwich often created a fluid 2-2-6 shape in settled possession with the full-backs overlapping, the wingers inverting, and the number ten advancing into the last line, leaving behind a 2-2 rest-defence.
City set up in the same base formation under Wagner, but they created a more rigid 3-4-3 diamond shape when one midfielder dropped between the centre-backs, the full-backs overlapped, and the wingers inverted.
When Norwich advanced towards the final third, this structure became more of a 3-1-6 as the wingers and the number ten moved into the last line, leaving behind a 3-1 rest-defence.
While all three coaches could be described as ‘positional’ – meaning their players’ positions are determined by spaces or zones on the pitch, as opposed to more fluid reference points – Thorup’s positional logic is different to that of the German duo.
All three coaches ensure the occupation of each of the five vertical corridors in settled possession, but Thorup often makes use of inverting full-backs to create his structures. The means by which these structures are generated depends on the players in the lineup.
The Dane began his time at Norwich with Callum Doyle shifting infield to create a back three, while Jack Stacey overlapped beyond the winger into the last line on the opposite side.
In this system, Kenny McLean and Marcelino Nunez remained deep, while the remaining midfielder advanced to create a 3-2-5 structure with a box midfield.
After the Oxford United loss, however, the system changed as Ben Chrisene came into the side and Doyle moved to centre-back. In this setup, Chrisene inverted into midfield from left-back, while McLean and Nunez shifted to the right to create a 2-3-5 shape.
A few games later, after a 1-0 loss away at Swansea, Norwich’s rotations in settled possession changed yet again. This time, Jose Cordoba and Kellen Fisher replaced Chrisene and Stacey, as Doyle moved back out to the left and Cordoba started at centre-back.
In this setup, both full-backs inverted into midfield, as opposed to one inverting and the other overlapping. This meant the right-winger had to stay wide to maintain the occupation of the five vertical corridors, while Nunez advanced into the right half-space, creating another 2-3-5.
While Thorup employs a variety of rotations to generate his settled-play structures, certain themes remain constant.
Depending on the opponent and the players selected, City either create a 2-3 or a 3-2 rest-defence. Unlike under Farke or Wagner, these subtly different structures tend to include either one or both of the full-backs.
To understand the logic behind this, it’s important to appreciate the role of the rest-defence. Simply defined as the defensive protection provided by one’s structure in possession, the rest-defence should mitigate the threats of defensive transitions.
In Farke and Wagner’s systems, where the rest-defence involved four players, the full-backs occupied spaces a significant distance from their defensive positions. In Thorup’s model, however, the full-backs remain close to these positions in a secure five-man rest-defence.
Without a strong rest-defence and in a system forcing players to cover large distances in transitions, it can become difficult to sustain pressure and too easy for an opponent to counter – both were recurring issues during Wagner’s time in East Anglia.
With two narrow full-backs, Thorup’s positional logic also opens passing lanes between the centre-backs and the wingers. This direct access between the first and last lines allows Norwich to quickly generate 1v1 and 2v1 situations out wide.
While it’s important to recognise that full-back inversions do not totally replace overlaps as an attacking dynamic, the positional adjustment requires a certain profile of player.
The success of a system employing inverted full-backs is heavily dependent on the coach’s ability to judge their players’ strengths. This is something Thorup continues to excel at.
Indeed, after Norwich’s 4-1 win against Watford, when Fisher had replaced Stacey at right-back, City’s head coach explained: “For some tactical reasons […] the full-back position was more inverted and more like a passing player […] we wanted Kellen to perform in that role.”
Unlike Stacey, who is more comfortable remaining wide and overlapping into the last line, Fisher is perfectly suited to the inverted role given his press resistance and technical quality in tight spaces – these qualities make Fisher one of the most exciting players in the division.
On the opposite side, Doyle has been a consistent starter and a key member of Thorup’s team. The hugely talented and versatile England under-21 international has performed numerous roles since joining Norwich in the summer.
Doyle is capable of playing both at centre-back and left-back, but the roles he performs and his movements in possession are the real indicators of his versatility.
The Man City loanee has performed the standard centre-back role, the hybrid left-back/left centre-back role and, more recently, he moved into the inverted left-back position.
In addition to moving infield in settled possession, Doyle occasionally inverts in deep build-up phases, either moving alongside McLean or into the space ahead of City’s midfield three.
This movement creates a dilemma for opponents pressing high. They can either leave Doyle free to receive between the lines, or a player from the back line could jump into midfield and leave space in behind for Borja Sainz or Josh Sargent to exploit.
Without Doyle’s versatility, it would be more difficult for Norwich to challenge the dynamics of their opponents press. He’s a player who allows Thorup significant tactical flexibility.
While it’s refreshing to hear that City’s new head coach understands these tactical considerations, it’s clear there remains a resistance to tactical discourse in football. Indeed, inverted full-backs are often used as a stick with which to beat such dialogue.
It’s fine not to be interested in the tactical nuance of modern football, but to dismiss it out of hand is to ignore the very thing that makes Thorup so impressive. It seems naïve to praise his approach without understanding it.
Ultimately, Thorup’s tactical prowess and openness challenge what some fans consider to be manufactured insights. As it turns out, ‘inverted full-backs’ are not merely fictitious inventions made by overthinking analysts – just ask Johannes.
You can read all Ben's previous analysis of Norwich City games via his social media accounts.
Web: NCFC Analysis
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here