Sports News

Originally developed by Johan Cruyff, and perfected by Pep Guardiola, Revolution interim head coach Clint Peay has brought the “inverted fullback” to Foxborough.

With only a handful regular season games remaining and a spot in MLS playoffs already clinched, it hardly seems like a normal time for the Revolution to suddenly implement a new tactical approach.

Yet that’s exactly what Clint Peay, New England’s interim head coach, is currently in the process of doing. Instead of fine-tuning the existing system, the Revolution are fully committing to some major changes. So far, his players appear to be enthusiastic participants.

Peay, 50, arrived in his current position three weeks ago after one of the most turbulent periods in Revolution history.

Former head coach Bruce Arena resigned following a protracted MLS investigation into “insensitive and inappropriate remarks” in which the league (eventually) “confirmed” some of the allegations. Interim head coach Richie Williams was subsequently replaced himself after reportedly losing the confidence of the players. Peay, formerly the coach of Revolution II, was chosen to replace Williams.

In that context, it would’ve been understandable if he had simply streamlined instructions to players and retained the same tactics, avoiding anything that might rock the boat any further within the locker room.

In his first game in charge, it appeared this would be the case: Peay selected a standard lineup that featured a 4-2-3-1 with a regular four-player backline.

Perhaps due to the result (New England lost 2-1 to the last place Colorado Rapids), or possibly due to simply having more time in his new role, Peay made a major change in his second game.

Against Chicago on Sept. 23 (a 2-2 draw), and again this past Saturday against Charlotte (a 2-1 win), Peay unveiled tactics that would’ve looked more familiar in Manchester, England than Foxborough. It produced fascinating but admittedly uneven results, and could end up being a defining feature for the rest of the season.

What is the new tactical system?

In short, Peay has started using defensive midfielder Matt Polster as an “inverted fullback.”

This means that Polster, accustomed to operating in the middle of the field, is being asked to do two different roles depending on the situation.

When the Revolution are defending (and do not have the ball), he remains in the space traditionally occupied by a normal fullback (or outside back, as it’s also known).

In general terms, it looks like this:

However, when the Revolution are in possession of the ball, Polster will move more into the center of the field, occupying something that more closely resembles his familiar defensive midfield space.

It results in a change of shape, and more players in the midfield, depending on the situation:

The term itself refers to an inversion of the fullback’s normal function (which is to stay wide, both in attack and defense). Some quibble with the term inverted fullback, preferring “underlapping fullback,” as it describes the function rather than which side a player is on in relation to their stronger foot. Whichever term is preferred, it has a ripple effect on how the rest of the team plays.

“It’s similar to what we were doing with Revs II,” Peay said in a press conference prior to the game against Charlotte.

“The idea,” he added, “is that we’re trying to get across connectivity with our group, numbers centrally, and guys in wide areas to stretch opponents.”

Where did this come from?

While Arena, particularly during his time with the Revolution, was known for being tactically “old school” (in the words of former Revolution goalkeeper Matt Turner), Peay’s usage of an inverted fullback is a decidedly modern idea.

One of the biggest proponents is Manchester City manager Pep Guardiola, whose team won virtually every possible trophy in 2023 and is known for his tactical acumen.

“The main reason is to have more players in the middle to pass the ball,” Guardiola said of the inverted fullback in a 2021 interview, noting that such a tactic allows for his team “to make short passes and [have] more and more control.”

Though popularized by Guardiola (first during his time with German club Bayern Munich and then with City), the inverted fullback originated with his late mentor: Dutch soccer legend Johan Cruyff.

Cruyff, who managed FC Barcelona from 1988-1996 (a team that eventually included Guardiola), developed the concept in order to help create a midfield diamond while not sacrificing the usage of wingers. It was all aimed at creating passing options for his players in a possession-oriented style.

Since Guardiola first began implementing his modern version, the term (and its usage) has proliferated.

As other coaches have tried to recreate the Spaniard’s successful methods, a formerly radical concept for fullbacks has started to become more mainstream (succinctly summarized in a recent soundbite from Tottenham Hotspur manager Ange Postecoglou, who responded to a question about his apparently nuanced tactical approach by admitting, “I’m just copying Pep, mate.”)

How is it working so far, and what might it mean for the playoffs?

As for Peay’s usage of the inverted fullback, it’s an idea that seems to make sense for the Revolution in current circumstances.

This mostly due to New England’s lack of depth at right back. With regular starter Brandon Bye out of the season with a torn right ACL, the Revolution don’t have an obvious replacement. Inserting Polster into the position, and asking him to move into midfield when his team has the ball, provides — at least in theory — a best-of-all-worlds solution.

It allows New England to get both Polster and fellow defensive midfielder Mark-Anthony Kaye into the same starting lineup without jeopardizing the defense of wider spaces.

“Part of that role is for [Polster] to be in a position where he is most comfortable,” Peay explained. “It [also] allows us to have others on the field be successful.”

The tactic has certainly produced tangible effects on the game: Polster has been one of the most involved players (in terms of touches on the ball, and completed passes) since beginning to work as an inverted fullback.

Still, the Revolution have occasionally looked vulnerable defensively with Polster shuttling between positions. This was especially true in the draw against Chicago. Both goals New England conceded in the game resulted from moves that began down the wing that Polster vacated. It was a problem that was exacerbated by Revolution turnovers (leaving Polster with no time to return to his defensive space).

Charlotte deliberately tried to exploit this potential weakness in the following game, deploying the speedy McKinze Gaines on Polster’s side. They tried to spring Gaines with repeated long balls towards the winger, but Peay and his players were able to adjust. At the start of the second half, DeJuan Jones moved back to his favored left back role (with Polster swapping to the right side).

The result was that Jones not only nullified the threat of Gaines, but began getting forward more often (assisting Dave Romney’s winning goal).