Inside Forwards and Inverted Wingers

[jdmk88]

Okay, so what's the difference?

In my mind, an inside forward is someone that should play much like an advanced forward in possession, then moves back to the wing when defending. I'm also expecting lots of diagonal runs across the marking full back.

An inverted winger (in my mind), sticks to the wing until he receives the ball. Then he cuts inside, with his main aim being to create, rather than score. 

In games however, I just can't see a difference. Stats, highlights, positioning...it just all looks the same. Am I missing something here?

[xOGxTerror]

Personally I've found in the last few additions of FM that inside forwards are more and more useless and I tend to get a lot more from using an IW with gets further forward on.

Could be completely related to my tactics or players I am picking, but I do find IF do not contribute much in build up even if on support. And they tend to sit a bit too narrow for my liking, not involving themselves much at all, whether with goals or assists. IW's tend to contribute a lot more with G+A  in my experience. But could be because I am usually using an AF, and they take up similar positions as the IF.

I'd like to know some player examples of an IF vs an IW as maybe I do not understand the roles as well as I think I do.

[Maddux]

Both roles are identical in their positioning and movement. The main differences are that the IF sees himself more as a goal threat and ignores other attackers more often in the box. He is more the oldschool version of inverted players. The IW is the more modern version of the IF now that many coaches preach a less 1-on-1 and more pass and team oriented style of play. You can see that when comparing the hardcoded PIs of each role. Both are identical except for the crossing PIs where you can instruct the IW to cross more often and from deep while the IF is hardcoded hitting less crosses.

[Robson 07]

11 minutes ago, xOGxTerror said:

I'd like to know some player examples of an IF vs an IW as maybe I do not understand the roles as well as I think I do.

Marcus Rashford (IF).  A striker that moves inward, from the left side in his case, getting the ball on to his stronger foot.  Looks to finish moves; strong counter attacking option; not a great defensive contributor.

Jack Grealish (IW).  More of a playmaking midfielder, plays wide from the left but is right-footed.   More likely to create a chance, and link the play, than be the cutting edge.  Makes sense given that Haaland is the goal scoring focal point.

 

[Cloud9]

3 hours ago, jdmk88 said:

Okay, so what's the difference?

In my mind, an inside forward is someone that should play much like an advanced forward in possession, then moves back to the wing when defending. I'm also expecting lots of diagonal runs across the marking full back.

An inverted winger (in my mind), sticks to the wing until he receives the ball. Then he cuts inside, with his main aim being to create, rather than score. 

In games however, I just can't see a difference. Stats, highlights, positioning...it just all looks the same. Am I missing something here?

Inverted wingers get involved in buildup play a bit more. Inside forwards make more goal scoring runs like a striker. 

[Mik_Fe]

I add.. IF moves more without the ball by cutting diagonally behind the opposing CB/WB, the IW receives the ball and then cuts inwards.. they play in two different ways with and without the ball. watch the whole match and pay attention.

[avenger22]

This year the IF is amazing so good movements without the ball, difference is IF goes inside and narrow much earlier and attacks the channels better than IW doesn't matter support or attack it is the role unique, but ofc an IW with sit narrow and other PI can get close but i think IF attacking runs are coded more unique that is what separates them.

[Zico10]

There's a few factors that I need to consider when choosing my wingers role;

1-How is my attacking approach play going to be: Through the center or wings

2-How many players am I going to commit going forward

3-How many central strikers I'm going to play(factor number 1 on choosing wingers role(IF or IW or W)

If playing 1 striker I prefer an IF as there's quite a bit of space for him to cut behind the enemy lines. If using IF and 2 strikers he will usually get his run blocked by the defenders marking one of the strikers so effectively you have 2 of your players(IF and ST) marked by 1 defender. If I play 2 strikers, I prefer to use IW or W depending of the strikers role. I use IW when playing 2 strikers both on F9 and WB's overlapping but I change role to W when using any other strikers role as they will play much more up than F9 and if I'm not using WB's or FB's on attack duty as both WB's or FB's and Wingers will meet in the same space in the wing.

 

My advice is have a save versus a top team and play it time and time again while micro-managing players instructions so you can see what works best (watch full match, no highlights).

[NineCloudNine]

I’m having success in FM24 with IFs and attacking WB/CWBs. In previous years they seemed to trip over each other but this year the movement of the IF seems much smarter and they cut in as soon as the WB pushes up. Combined with a Half Back finally dropping in between the CBs as they should, this makes for some very sweet attacking play.

I do see this aggressive cutting in more with IFs than IWs. IFs seem much more direct and aggressive. It does depend a lot on the player’s traits and PIs though. Various combinations of those can easily cause a lot of overlap between the roles.

Edited December 23, 2023 by NineCloudNine