Understanding Bruno Fernandes: The False 10

“That’s an uncharacteristically misplaced pass from Bruno Fernandes!” is an all too common and rather contradictory phrase that commentators announce most games – considering 69% of attacking midfielders and wingers in world football have a better pass completion %. The idea of Bruno Fernandes differs from the actual Bruno Fernandes that plays each match-day for Manchester United. I suppose how the wider world of football perceives Bruno is heavily dictated by his remarkable output.

The contentious United midfielder divides opinion despite sitting at the right end of both the goals and assist charts with 16 goals (2nd) and 10 assists (3rd) in the Premier League. Superficially, with an output of 26 goal contributions in 28 Premier league starts, the idea that Bruno is not the magnificent all-round creative #10 has to be whispered. Nonetheless, this is not a piece that aims to slander Bruno Fernandes. Rather it seeks to understand his strengths and role through a different lens. Under the current lens, Bruno is spoken about as a #10 and discourse around him speaks about his qualities in a way that overrates his ability. When judging Bruno for what he is, a kind of high-risk second-striker type that also roams the midfield, he deserves more of his praise.

His output (including his chance creation and xA stats) as well as United’s brief fling at the top of the league has clouded how the football fan views Bruno. Bruno is not a great true #10 and that is despite providing almost one goal contribution per game. Iconic #10s in recent memory played the game between the lines, floating quite elusively within the small spaces whilst waiting for the perfect moment to pick the lock and find their striker. Players like Ozil and Riquelme hold the perfect threaded through ball in their locker and a rather beautiful ability known as La Pausa or The Pause (the ability to slow the game down, luring defenders out before exploiting the space) is seen in the games of Xavi and David Silva. La Pausa or the pin-point line breaking pass are both attributes that aren’t strong or fundamental to Bruno’s game.

The Submachine Gun vs. The Sniper (Chance Creation Styles)

Instead Bruno plays the game at a quick pace, direct, firing high-risk passes and shots at a high volume through banks of defenders attempting to create something out of nothing – and now. Bruno’s game is that of a hip-firing submachine gun whereas the more traditional #10s of old picked passes with breath held like accomplished snipers, taking a more calculated and deliberate approach. This piece isn’t a David Silva vs Bruno comparison piece but the way in which they play their game is stylistically on opposing poles so comparing some of their stats can highlight how Bruno’s role should be reevaluated.

In the Premier League, Bruno attempts 13.95 long passes per 90 minutes putting him in the 99th percentile for long passes attempted amongst wingers and attacking midfielders. In terms of completing these long passes though, Bruno lies in the 50th percentile, only completing 55.2%. 

David Silva (20/21) makes 8.02 long passes per 90. This is less than Bruno but remains a significant sample size falling in the 82nd percentile for long passes attempted per 90. Contrary to Bruno’s completion numbers, David Silva is in the 99th percentile for long passes completed. The hip-firing submachine gun against the sniper…volume and precision.

The submachine gun approach might sound alluring, with the seemingly successful outpouring of goals and assists it brings, however there are reoccurring instances in which the gun seems to run out of ammunition. For Bruno Fernandes and Ole’s Manchester United, this type of approach gets stuck against teams that sit deep and keep the central areas compact. Against these teams you would expect your creative traditional #10 to unlock the defence but Bruno’s influence on the game was relatively silent in the loss to bottom of the league Sheffield United and in the draw to relegation candidates West Bromwich Albion. 

West Brom played a compact 4141 low block – a shape that prevents space centrally with its three central midfielders forcing United to play down the flanks. High risk actions facing two lines of defence (4 defenders and 5 midfielders) are unlikely to be successful and space is required for these less intricate, direct actions to come off. 

Similarly, Sheffield United opted for a 532 using three central midfielders to similar effect. United had 73% possession but their striker, Cavani, had 0 shots, amassing a mere 21 touches all game. The creative players (including Bruno at #10) failed to find United’s #9 and as a result Diagne, the West Brom forward, had more touches and shots than Cavani in a team that had 27% possession.

Bruno’s heat map vs Sheffield United illustrates how he was not afforded space centrally, rather drifting wide when up against this system. A more traditional #10 in James Maddison occupied central areas far more when facing this same Sheffield United 532, his actions on the ball typically being more calculated and of lower risk too. One final heat map to illustrate this idea is from United’s game against Southampton, space was available considering Southampton were down to 10 men from the second minute and in this game Bruno was able to pick up the ball and played with it in the vacant spaces centrally.

Bruno vs. Sheffield United

Maddison vs. Sheffield United

Bruno vs. Southampton

Bruno’s role: What is it and how do we assess it?

Discussion around how Bruno should be described have evolved with some people beginning to call him a “second striker” and although this briefly captures the general essence of my point I think it does a slight disservice to the role of Bruno. 

Bruno does not play the game as to create chances like a creative #10. He is nothing like the archetypal 10s – the likes of Riquelme, Özil and Silva. If that is his aim or his prescribed role, based on how well he executes it, he should be judged to be quite poor at it. Bruno does not thrive in the small spaces or between the lines. Under those constraints he possesses a strong ability to flick it to a team mate first time with his back to goal but otherwise Bruno fails to receive and control the ball, dribble or pick a pinpoint pass against compact defences. 

So if Bruno, who lines up as a #10 on the team sheet, fails to possess the qualities inherent to the traditional #10’s game, reevaluating his role helps us explain his wildly impressive 26 goal contributions. On the ball, Bruno’s attacking game is summarised by around high-risk, final third actions and (most importantly) at a high volume too.

Bruno’s game revolves around his two strongest qualities: his ball striking ability and his mentality, which encompasses leadership and taking responsibility for most of United’s attacking game. It makes sense for a player who is as accomplished at striking the ball as he is – to utilise this ability. The catalogue of great strikes Bruno has scored in his short United career is growing each week and although these long shots might be perceived as ‘low quality chances,’ Bruno’s ability to strike the ball is much better than the average midfielder so relatively these low quality chances are chances of higher quality for Bruno. The xG charts underrepresent how likely those long shots are in resulting in a goal. Bruno affects games against teams that suffocate space through shots rather than his passes. His incredible ability to hit the ball as well as his sense for being in the box, making late runs and getting on the end of crosses or cutbacks explains his output. In this sense, he affects the game like a second striker. 

Bruno’s wonder strike vs Everton. Bruno breaches this compact opposition with three central midfielders (4312) – not through chance creation but instead utilising his ball striking ability.

Bruno does offer more than the typical second striker though and his contribution in the second phase and off the ball is atypical to the second striker archetype. Mentality (an intangible) might be perceived as unimportant by most fans when speaking about roles however as the leader in possession, the game is played almost primarily through Bruno.

Bruno says, “[Upon arrival] the manager told me to not be afraid, to continue to take risks, to maintain the same mentality,” a mentality that has Bruno demand the ball and often. The ball is at his feet more than most players as Bruno is in the 99th percentile for touches and passes attempted by attackers. The attacker that tops both the touches and passes attempted per 90 table is Lionel Messi, another player whose team relies very heavily on to play through and at time both Messi and Bruno can be seen dropping into deeper positions to pick up the ball. The XI plays to facilitate their game. No striker, winger or attacking midfielder in the Premier League has more touches than Bruno this season (2,165). Mason Mount is in second place by a considerable margin with 1,827 touches. With the amount of touches Bruno takes and the positions he finds himself in, at times deep in midfield (see his touch map vs Palace below), it is clear his role is not restricted to only playing in and around the number 9. He almost has a free role. He picks the ball up deep, likes to feel involved and contributes with aggression when United are out of possession. 

Bruno’s touches vs. Crystal Palace. Circled are notable touches within his own half.

In an interview around his role, Bruno emphasises how defensively he attempts to help United to the best of his ability trying to “be the first one to react, to call on other attacking players to help win back possession”. He is a tenacious and hungry, sometimes naive defender, in the top 10% of attackers for pressures on the ball and whilst being dribbled past more than 95% of attackers in the world, this display of aggression and pressing from the front illustrates another facet of his leadership. Teammates see the actions of others and although Bruno does not dictate the tempo with his on the ball “pausa” – he effects the tempo at which his teammates play by how they perceive him in the moment. In a difficult phase of the game the leader who walks with his head down causes his team to play without conviction. When a leader tracks back 30 yards to make a slide tackle, his companions take note. Bruno contributes more than just shooting within and around the box. His output alongside the pressure he applies (top 10%) and opposition dribbles he contests (top 7%) combines to form quite a unique profile. Bruno plays the game with the desire and freedom of young children who play the sport for fun.

The sheer volume of touches, passes and shots attempted put a number upon the idea that a lot of the game goes through Bruno. In the final third, you have to judge Bruno like a striker. He does not have the ability to thread an eye of the needle ball through the lines to his #9. He is not an elite creator at all despite his high xA and chance creation stats. Hot take? Potentially but save your tweets, I propose that these high creation numbers can be explained via three means:

1) The relatively simple ability to find his incredible outlets (Rashford, James etc.) in behind when space is afforded to them on the counter.  

2) The sheer volume of hopeful and low quality passes made when facing team’s that are compact and prevent open space.

3) The fact that in the final third Bruno takes up positions within the box often. In these areas the little flick, the short passes or the deflected shot are taken in dangerous areas close to the goal. They are likely to result in forward players being found in goal scoring areas. 

And although the assertion that Bruno is a poor creator might be met with shock, Bruno is relatively self aware (demonstrating again the quality of his mentality). He speaks about the need to do more for his team-mates. “I’ve provided some assists but I think that I could have provided more given the quality we have up front,” he says. “Had they been provided better service, they would have scored more goals than they have so far.” This honest reflection is in line with how I view Bruno. 

In summary:

Bruno holds his leadership central to his role. In attack, Bruno performs high risk actions, succeeding through shots due to his great striking of the ball and positioning within the box (like a second striker). He makes many high risk passes too however he lacks the quality to execute these often and these passes subsequently result in wasted possession. 

Out of possession, he has an admirable demeanour and the quality to run hard and in many games. As a creator he has a few traits he falls back on: the first time flicks with his back to goal (his main and only real successful action between the lines) and the ability to find his wide forward running in behind when there is space.

Otherwise he is unable to create as well as #10s might be expected to, particularly against teams that pack the central areas. It is for these reasons that the idea of Bruno as an elite creator are very flawed. Judging him as a second striker (in attack) makes more sense and allows us to praise parts of the game he actually influences but the term second striker (overall) ignores his contributions off the ball and his involvement deeper, illustrated by his vast number of touches per game.

Pondering on how best to describe this unique profile I settled on calling it The False 10. A number 10 on the team sheet who influences the game in all the areas around the central #10 zone – whilst rarely playing in that area itself. A scorer within and around the box and ball-heavy second phase player, without the quality to play in the spaces and make the incisive pass. Bizarre.

In the modern game, where spaces are compact and clubs use algorithms focused on analysing and maximising high quality chances, Bruno’s free roaming, ball-dominant role is a romanticised throwback to the midfielders of the 2000s. The fact that Bruno is given the freedom to play the game in this way allows him to succeed, receiving plaudits for his incredible output and when looking at how well he executes this mix of an output focused, second-striker with the ball-heavy second-phase leader, it is clear he plays to a very high level. He is given a large responsibility and has mostly delivered on carrying the burden.

A question arises at whether this is entirely effective and efficient in the long term though. Is it the best idea to allow a below-par creator to have so much possession each game? Are there ways in which Bruno’s unique skill set can better be utilised? I think so. His actions in those second striker spaces are impressive but the touches he takes deeper are potentially wasted – with many players in world football more suited to that build up role. I hold reservations at how well a team can perform over the season, especially domestically, when centred this heavily around Bruno’s game but that is a conversation for another day. Bruno has a skillset that can be useful and he can play role of value but, in a possession-heavy, more balanced side, it requires paying closer attention to his qualities and seeing where they fit best which may end up elevating the squad’s performance at the expense of some of Bruno’s top 2 and 3 output.