Giving your best midfielder ‘freedom’ sounds pretty straightforward, right?. You allow them to do whatever they want, right? But that’s where people go wrong. It’s not ‘whatever they want’, but instead trusting them to support what the team needs in any given moment. There’s a difference.

If they drop towards the ball, who provides the next forward connection? If they move wide, who occupies the space inside? If they run beyond the striker, who supports the attack underneath?

These questions are what separate a useful roaming role from a player simply moving wherever they want.

Before looking at Bellingham’s movements for England, it is worth understanding where this idea comes from. And then we can look at how we could apply this to our own coaching and analysis.

“Roaming midfielder” describes a way of playing rather than a precise position. The player might start as a No.8 or a No.10, but their responsibility is not confined to one area of the pitch. They have permission to change their location according to the problem the team needs to solve.

That freedom has appeared in different forms throughout football’s history. (And I’ve linked some other useful articles below)

Johan Cruyff offers one important example, although he was a forward rather than a conventional midfielder. In the Netherlands’ 1974 team, his starting position did not prevent him from moving into other areas to receive and create. His movement belonged to a wider system in which teammates also changed positions. It was not simply one exceptional player being excused from the team’s structure.

Argentina’s use of Diego Maradona in 1986 provides a different example. Before the quarter-final against England, Carlos Bilardo added Héctor Enrique to midfield in place of a forward. That adjustment helped ‘create the conditions’ for Maradona to influence the game. His individual freedom was supported by a deliberate decision about the players around him.

These were different players in different systems. They should not be treated as identical versions of the same role. However, they illustrate a principle that remains relevant: allowing a player to move freely does not remove the need to organise the team.

The player’s location can change while their contribution remains clear. They might help the team progress, connect an attack or threaten the space behind the defence. Where they do that depends on what the game presents.

“A free role” can sound like an instruction to stop coaching a player and let their talent take over. But more useful way to think about it is that you are giving them greater responsibility for choosing how to fulfil their role.

They still need to understand what the team is trying to achieve, what their movement changes for teammates and what they must do when possession is lost. Freedom gives them more decisions to make, not fewer responsibilities.

Bellingham finished England’s 7–0 win against Croatia, with a goal and three assists. Those numbers describe his attacking contribution, but the footage reveals more about how he became involved.

He was not restricted to receiving centrally behind the striker. Across these examples, he appears on both sides of the pitch, drops into the build-up and threatens spaces beyond the defence.

We cannot work out England’s exact instructions from the footage alone without actually asking the England staff themselves. But what we can analyse is how his movements changed the options available to the player with the ball.

The first image shows Bellingham moving into the right-sided area rather than remaining in a central attacking position. The second shows him involved on the other side of the pitch, closer to halfway.

The significance here is not simply that he covers a lot of ground. By changing his position, he can offer a passing angle that was not available when he stood centrally and create an overload where one is needed.

Moving towards a flank can give the ball carrier an additional nearby option. It also asks an opponent to decide whether to follow him away from their original position or pass responsibility to a teammate. That decision can affect the space available elsewhere.

However, an extra player near the ball does not automatically create an advantage. If everyone moves towards the same area, the team can become easier to contain. The movement needs to preserve options away from the pressure as well as improve the immediate connection.

When analysing this, I would look beyond Bellingham’s position. Does his arrival help someone receive facing forward? Does it draw an opponent out? Is there still a player available inside or beyond the pressure?

(Because too much analysis out there only says, “Bellingham moved here”, “Bellingham moved there”. Yes but why and what problem were England trying to solve by doing this)

Those questions tell us more than simply identifying an overload.

In these sequences, Bellingham comes deeper to become involved in England’s progression.

An attacking midfielder can sometimes become disconnected from the build-up. They may be standing in a dangerous position, but that position has limited value if the ball cannot reach them.

Dropping can help make a connection. It changes the angle of the pass and may allow the player to receive outside an opponent’s immediate pressure. From there, they can look to carry forward or connect with a teammate higher up.

There is a trade-off though. If Bellingham comes towards the ball, he is no longer occupying his previous position between the lines. England therefore need another forward option if the movement is going to help them progress rather than simply retain possession.

That is an important distinction for coaches. A deeper position is not automatically a signal that a player should have stayed higher. Equally, getting a touch does not prove that dropping was the right decision.

The question is whether the movement improves the team’s route forward. If it does great, if it doesn’t we need to coach them to get better, because remember that is one of the things we are trying to achieve.

This sequence makes the relationship around his movement much clearer.

As Bellingham becomes involved deeper on the left, the left-back moves into a different position ahead and inside him. The left centre-back remains part of the connection underneath.

Bellingham’s movement is therefore not an isolated action. It sits within a change in the positions of several players (teammates interacting), again to try and progress the ball down that side.

That matters because a roaming player can otherwise leave a gap without creating anything useful. Here, the rotation gives England different passing angles and preserves a connection further forward. The players are changing who occupies the spaces rather than all abandoning the same area.

It would be a mistake to describe this as Bellingham moving freely while everyone else stays in place. His teammates also adapt and move freely to, in order to create progression.

For the opposition, that creates a decision. Following Bellingham deeper may open space for another player. Holding position may allow him to receive with less pressure. Neither response guarantees England an advantage, but the rotation creates a problem Croatia themselves have to solve.

For a coach, the lesson is to teach the relationship rather than only the individual movement. “You can drop” is incomplete if the players around that movement do not understand how to respond to this player dropping. “Go where you want to” again isn’t prescriptive. Go where? When? How? with Who? So this role still needs the correct coaching and detail.

A roaming role should not become a habit of always moving towards the ball.

There are moments when Bellingham’s value comes from remaining higher. By occupying space beyond the opposition’s midfield, he gives England a potential forward connection and makes it harder for defenders to focus entirely on the ball.

Receiving is only one possible benefit. His position can also affect an opponent’s willingness to step forward and press someone else.

The forward-running examples show another part of the role. When a teammate comes towards the ball, Bellingham can threaten the space beyond them.

If a striker drops and every supporting player also comes short, the attack loses depth. A defender can then move forward without having to account for a runner behind.

A midfield run changes that. It gives the player with the ball another option while asking the defensive line to manage movement in the opposite direction.

The timing matters a lot here of course. A run beyond is more useful when the ball carrier has an opportunity to find it. Making the movement while the passer is under heavy pressure may remove a supporting option without creating a realistic forward pass.

Bellingham’s freedom therefore includes deciding when to support the ball and when to move away from it.

This is where the distinction between purpose, objectives, principles, tactics and individuals becomes useful.

The purpose is not to give Bellingham freedom for its own sake. It is to help the team create scoring opportunities and win the game. An objective within that might be to progress beyond the opposition’s midfield with someone able to continue the attack.

The principles should explain the repeatable behaviours of what needs to achieve the objective. The team might need a forward connection, a threat behind the defence and support around the ball. Those responsibilities do not always have to belong to the same players as well.

The tactics are the specific ways the team attempts to apply those principles. Bellingham dropping on the left while the left-back moves inside is one example of an interactive movement to try and solve a problem. Moving towards a flank to provide another connection is another.

Finally, the individuals need to recognise when those actions are useful. Can the ball carrier play forward? Is Bellingham being followed? Has a teammate already occupied the space he wants to enter? Who will provide depth if he comes short?

This is more practical than giving a player a broad instruction to “find space”. There is space on a football pitch that has little value to the attack. The player needs to recognise which space helps the team achieve its objective.

I would not begin by copying all of Bellingham’s movements or giving every midfielder the same freedom.

I would choose one recurring situation and make the shared responsibilities clear. For example, when an attacking midfielder drops to help the build-up, the team still needs a connection beyond the opposition’s midfield. Players can then explore different ways to keep that connection and providing guided discovery as to ‘why’ they are doing it will help them do it more.

The review should focus on the effect of their decisions. Did dropping help the team progress? Did another player occupy the space ahead? Did the movement create a useful option or bring another defender towards the ball?

So that gives you a way to develop freedom without judging every action against a fixed starting position.

Bellingham’s performance is a useful reminder that a player can influence the game from several locations. But the coaching lesson is not simply to let your best player roam. It is to define what the team needs, then help players recognise when changing position will provide it.

It’s been good to chat and remember you can refer this Newsletter to other coaches and analyst (and you will win free prizes for doing so). Here’s your personal referral code: {{rp_referral_code}}

Talk soon,

Lucas

P.S. If you want to make those relationships clearer in your own team, the Game Model Builder can help you work through your purpose, objectives, principles, tactics and individual responsibilities. Start with what you want the team to achieve, then decide how much flexibility each role needs.