THE FULL BACK GAME
Robert Crompton, 17/10/1908

It is difficult at this time of day to say anything new on the subject of back-play in Association football. The qualitice demanded of a back are exactly the same as those which were indispensable at the very beginning of English football, but there may be some little interest in considering the manner in which they are applied nowadays.

Essential qualition for a good back are eight, strength, speed, and weight. I am no believer in the little player in any pertion of the field. There have been a host of elever little men in the history of the game who have received, and worthily, the highest honours open to a footballer. But how much better a player would each of these men have been for an added inch or two in stature! In the old days, when forwards relied to a great extent upon their dribbling powers, it is possible that small men, by reason of their superior quickness and the difficulty there would be in charging them effectively, deserved to be encouraged; but to-day, when mere cleverness, in England at any rate, in at a discount, and teams depend upon quick, sharp dashes into goal ending with a last shot or a "header" between the posts, heavy men and tall men are the most deadly.

THE QUALITIES OF A GOOD BACK. 

To meet these rushes, then, a back should be able to stand up to a vigorous wing, to head out, no matter how faet the ball may be travelling, to be speedy in esse he has to race for the ball, and, above all — and especially if he be not fast — to be smart in recovering from an abortive tackle, so that he may run back and regain a defensive position. When I say "stand up," I do not mean that a back should stand "to be shot at" by active opponents. There is no better method of defence than a vigorous attack, and when his goal is threatened the back's duty is to get in the first blow. Under no circumstances should he allow himself to be forced back into goal; rather should he dash out to the ball when the odds are ten to one against him than hamper his own goalkeeper and allow the enemy to get in a shot for which he may be "unsighted." When play is in midfield, too, the aggressive policy is the best, provided that your partner can be trusted, although, of course, the alteration of the offside law, which allows forwards to stand on the half-way line, prescribes caution in "following up."

THE ART OF DEFENCE.

The usual method of defence, and the one which I believe in, is for the back to pay particular attention to the outside forward while the half-back in front of him watches the inside forward. The other back at the moment that any one of his colleagues tackles an opponent runs into centre, to cover a possible slip, or to intercept a pass, while the other two halves hold the opposite wing in check. There are people who argue that a more effective disposition would be for the backs to cover the inside men and the half-backs to hang on the outside forwards; but experiments made by my own team have proved that to be a fallacy. Inside men always lie nearer their half-backs than wingers, and if a full-back lies on an inside player he must necessarily very often find himself further up the held than his own half, and with his flank consequently turned. It may be said that a back need not lie right up when his half-back is tackling an outsider; but what good would he be at all if he is not near enough to prevent the winger's partner taking a pass and settling on the ball? On the other hand, with the half-back waiting on the inside player he can prevent that man passing either out to the wing or to the centre; or, if he fails in this, the full-back can cover him in either direction.

MY MODEL BACK.

If I ever had a model for back play I think it must have been Tom Branden, the old Blackburn Rovers' and Sheffield Wednesday international. He was, in his best days, s very dashing player, a wonderfully sure kick, and a great tackler. His roshes seemed risky, but he seldom failed to get either man or ball — or both. In his later yeare he lost some of hie intrepidity, and developed a habit of falling back into goal. I have been accused of the same thing myself on ocensions, but I venture to hope it has been without real reason. It has usually occurred when I have been beaten by the outside forward, and when eurely it was better for me to make the best of my way into goal rather then enter upon a vain pursuit of my antagonist, And this brings me to the complete understanding which ought always to exist between a back and his goalkeeper. There have been many instances of almost perfect defences, due not so much to any outstanding ability on the part of either backs or goalkeepers as to the three working smoothly together, just there have been many cases of matches being lost through confusion at the critical moment among the rearguard. I not only believe in the back who keeps well out when under pressure, but I believe in the goalkeeper who makes him go out, and who is not afraid to open his mouth when he is prepared to take the ball himself. Nothing looks worse than to see a custodian and a back falling over each other to get at the ball. The blame in such a case must fall on the goalkeeper, for he always has the advantage of being able to use his hands, and a simple shent of "All right!" would enable the back to face round and keep the onrushing forwards at bay.

METHODS OF ATTACK.

It is often said that the defence is stronger than the attack in football to-day, and that something is required to enable more goals to be scored in order to maintain public interest. Personally, I think last season produced quite sufficient goals for the forward play we got, and I am convinced that the laws as they stand afford plenty of scope for more scoring if the forwards really understood the game. The new offside law is not taken advantage of as it ought to be to spreadeagle defence, nor do players vary their style in order to bewilder backs as they might. Examples of the success of the long-passing game will recur to every follower of football, but how often do we see forward lines who deliberately adopt and keep up such a style? Very seldom indeed, as I have had occasion to lament when captaining a team, and to congratulate myself upon when opposing doughty rivale. The short-passing game is all very well in its way, but every back knows how to meet it. No defender in the world, however, can keep his end up for long under the pressure of an attack by men who cross the bell from one wing to the other, and avoid the conventional modes of forwarde centring. But when forwards stick to one style, even though they are sent back time after time, the backs have an easy task.

A PERSONAL INSTANCE.

I may be excused for mentioning a particular instance of this which came within my own experience in the last England v. Scotland match. The Scottish Selectors placed on the left wing the famous Quinn of the Celtic — famous, that is, se a centre-forward. The idea, I suppose, was that he would be able to utilise the trickiness and speed he showed at centre, but as a matter of fact his only idea of getting forward was to shove the ball past me and run for it and nothing is easier than to defeat such tactics. There are, of course, famous wing players who have quite stereotyped methods which sometimes "come off," and at other times signally fail. Let me give a hint to wing forwards, who appear to believe that they must not part with the ball until the back has tackled them. Nothing annoys a full-back so much en being drawn out to the wing only to see the forward centre or part before he can get there. It not only causes him useless exertion, but it makes him look soft. The forward who thinks, because he has once beaten a back with the ball, he can do it again and again, will soon discover his mistake. I remember last year a very "smart" outside forward who got the better — once — of Sharp, the splendid Woolwich Arsenal back who played for Scotland. He tried after time to repeat the trick, but every time sharp was too good for him, the result being that that wing was aan abject failure on the day's play. A forward who cannot impart variety to his play is not worth his place.

THE USE OF WEIGHT.

The most serious handicap under which a fast and weighty back suffers nowadays is the uncertainty as to how the referee will regard charging. The laws say that charging is permissible "when not violent" or dangerous — which seems like taking back with one hand what is given by the other. The Football Association have since directed that proper charging should be encouraged, but we still find referees who bring undeserved opprobrium upon backs guilty of using their weight. In an athletic game which is something more than an exhibition of mechanical cleverness, these gentlemen seem out of place. If a forward is allowed to use to the full an advantage he may possess in the way of great speed, why should not the back be allowed to use his avoirdupois to counteract it? And how in the world is a man to charge another effectively unless he uses both his weight and his speed? Mere hustling of an opponent is all very well when you are close enough to rub shoulders, but how can one stop to regulate his pace to a nicety if he is making a twenty yards' sprint to "get there"? A half-hearted charge is worse than no charge at all, for your opponent will then knock you down! My advice, in spite of these timid officials, is to charge whenever you are certain that it is necessary either to get the ball or prevent an opponent from getting it. If you miss the ball don't miss the man, if by upsetting him you can reap a legitimate advantage.

Finally, no back, and no pair of backs, however good, can hope to set up a successful defence without a perfect understanding with the half-back line. This is even more important than combination in front, for without good backing up a forward line gets no chance to score goals. A settled plan from centre forward to goal is a good thing; a complete working understanding with the rear is absolutely indispensable.