In the course of a conversation with a friend (hard to believe, we accept, that running a blog like this is not a complete impediment to positive human interaction) last week, we came to a realisation that not everybody has a base understanding of why certain numbers belong in certain positions.
He has a Gaelic football background (where teams of 15 generally line out in five lines, numbered 2-15 in order) and cited as an example that he was confused why 2 and 3 are traditionally at the opposite sides of the field in football. As a result, we were inspired to compose this post, the first of a series on the history and evolution of shirt numbering in football.
While numbers were first used in English league football by Arsenal and Sheffield Wednesday in 1928, that was a one-off experiment it wasn’t until the 1933 FA Cup final that they gained wider notice, Everton wearing 1-11 and Manchester City 12-22.
They became permanent the following season, and ran logically, according to the 2-3-5, or pyramid, system in fashion then (left). Numbers 2 and 3 were known as the full-backs, a term which remains today.
By the 1930s, however, 2-3-5 was already dying out, with many teams switching to what was known as the W-M formation, dropping an extra player back to deal with changes in the offside laws (right).
By and large in Britain, it was the central player of the three half-backs who was placed between the full-backs but kept the number 5. Like full-back, centre-half is a term which remains despite its meaning having changed.
While the 3-3-4 was briefly in vogue, with the number 8 playing alongside 4 and 6 in what was now known as midfield, Brazil’s winning of the 1958 World Cup with a 4-2-4 prompted others to try to ape that system.
In Britain, it was usually the left-half who was withdrawn into central defence alongside 5 (left), though at some clubs – and in Ireland and continental European countries like France and Germany – it was often 4 who moved to centre-back with 6 operating as the defensive midfield.
While leading to attacking football, the 4-2-4 wasn’t the most defensively solid of formations and so, gradually, the wide forwards, 7 and 11, came to play deeper as well.
This gave us the 4-4-2 (right) was was common throughout the 1970s and 1980s, though there were of course exceptions as players’ preferences sometimes went against the ‘right’ number for their position.
8 Comments
[…] Five weeks later. A multidisciplinary team was formed to build an old hackathon (18 months ago) feature for OSM. Nice! And to top it off, a real football feature! A feature that I pitched together with Head of Texts Luuk. A couple of weeks with full focus on one feature has a big advantage: room for attention to the details of the feature. In the first planning, the idea to write a blog already surfaced. Happy days! So which football feature are you talking about? Messi = Barcelona = 10. Mbappé = PSG = 7. Salah = Liverpool = 11. Hazard = Chelsea = 10. However, if you line-up your players in OSM, the squad numbers are linked to their position on the pitch. And that’s just not done, at least in the eyes of the purists. Let’s give players a fixed squad number, just like in real life. o/ What if our managers (or clubs without managers) don’t assign squad numbers to their players? Squad number-less players in official matches isn’t allowed. In a friendly match maybe, but that’s as far as we will go. So we thought we’d create an algorithm that assigns squad numbers automatically. Next question, which player gets the number 7 shirt? Normally we would say that’s reserved for the right midfielder or the right winger in the starting eleven. But OSM doesn’t categorise players as playing on the right or left side of the pitch. The solution: Goalkeeper (1), defenders (2,3,5,6), midfielders (4,7,8,11), forwards (9,10). This dates back to football in the 20’s when the formation 2-3-5 (yes, 5 forwards) was commonly used. During those days, squad numbers were officialized, based on that formation, left to right. The 2-3-5 formation evolved into the WM formation, 4-2-4 formation and finally the 4-4-2 formation. The squad numbers, however, stayed the same. (source) […]
[…] De oplossing: Keeper(1), verdedigers(2,3,5,6), middenvelders(4,7,8,11), aanvallers(9,10). Deze indeling is gegroeid uit het voetbal uit de jaren 20 van de vorige eeuw, toen de formatie 2-3-5 (Ja, 5 aanvallers!) gemeengoed was. Rond die tijd werden ook rugnummers ingevoerd en die werken op basis van die 2-3-5 formatie van links naar rechts gegeven. Door de jaren heen is 2-3-5 gegroeid naar de WM formatie, 4-2-4 formatie en daarna de 4-4-2 formatie. De rugnummers zijn in die jaren niet meeveranderd. (bron) […]
I think it was only internationally Statto? He had 11 at Inter before he joined Arsenal. Adebayor wearing it is a tribute as far as I know.
Didn’t Kanu wear 4 (when available) and internationally?
I know Adebayor wears 4 for Togo as well.
Hi Jay,
this was intended as a history lesson rather than an opinion piece. Those changes happened as described.
It doesn’t see 4-4-2 as a pinnacle – it specifically said it was the first of a series – but 4-4-2 was used by the majority of teams in England when squad numbers came in.
Apologies, Denis. When talking about your slant on matters, I am referring to this – glorious – site as a whole, not this particular article. This piece is incredibly informative and I take issue with none of it.
I quite like 2 as a centre-back, not too keen on 3, but that’s just me, I accept that there are other opinions available. I dislike 5 and 6 together in midfield because I grew up with 4-4-2. If 5 and 6 are in midfield, then one of the forwards’ numbers has to go in defence, which I’m sure you’ll agree doesn’t make sense.
Ah, thank you for this. I’m sure Inverting the Pyramid is excellent, but this bitesize chunk is all I needed.
A couple of things: Firstly, doesn’t this make for a very strong argument for a whole host of your own bugbears? 2 and 3 being worn by centrebacks? 5 and 6 in midfield? With all the new-fangled formations (and 4-4-2, which you seem to view as the blueprint, so rarely seen nowadays) shouldn’t a nod to any bygone era be applauded?
Secondly, prior to a schools football match at the age of 11 – my first 11-a-side game, I believe – positions were quickly allocated just before kickoff. The question was asked “Who wants to play centre-half?” and, having never heard the term before, I assumed this meant “centre midfield”. The manager was happy (I didn’t understand why me being “a tall lad” was relevant – this was long before Vieira’s heyday) and I took my place on the field. “What the f*ck are you doing there? You’re in defence, you idiot!” swiftly followed from the captain, and I’m sure a teenage Jonathan Wilson would have lapped it all up.
Sincerely,
D. Advocate