eds » Mon Nov 17, 2014 4:48 am wrote:Kash_Mountain » Sun Nov 16, 2014 10:06 am wrote:Everyone knows that BR was inspired by Bielsa following the seminar he attended and consequent discussions they had. This resulted in the way we played last season. This season, he's reverted back to his 'philosophy' aka Barcelona style, which for all intense and purposes is now an almost outdated way of playing. He's dropped everything from last season. His stubbornness and arrogance in sticking with this old Barcelona style way of playing shows that he does not have the presence of mind to be a good Manager (he is a Coach, never a Manager, not yet, as I've said previously). He made several promises to the Owners about the EPL title, CL etc. He will not be able to deliver if LFC continue in the same vain, and because he is so stubborn and arrogant (not getting the help required when it's really needed, because he thinks all the right Coaches are already at the Club). Imo, I think he'll be gone before the seasons finished.
It's funny that you mention Bielsa, because I have seen most of Chile's games for the last 10 years (or so) and absolutely marvelled at way he was able to transform them from a poor team that went from finishing last in their qualifiers (2002WC), missing out on qualifying (2006WC) to an exceptional attacking team topping the qualifying table with Brazil (for the 2010WC) in what is the hardest region to qualify from in world football. Chile's current coach, Jorge Sampaoli has slightly tweaked Bielsa's attacking blue print and Chile has still maintained a solid run since he took over in 2012.
I think Stu actually hit the nail on the head with the fact that you actually need world class players to be able to carry out your blue print. You can't expect average or inappropriate players in your squad to adapt to different positions / strategies if they just don't have the skill or talent required to execute it.
Bielsa was able to re-build the Chilean national team back in 2007 by carrying out two massive mind shifts, one he told the established players that there time was up and two he started re-shaping the side based on the up-and-coming talented U-20 side who had just won bronze at the 2007 U-20 FIFA World Cup, most notably Mauricio Isla, Gary Medal, Carlos Carmona, Arturo Vidal and Alexis Sanchez. These two latter players would later develop into elite players.
His maniac attacking approach worked because he selected players that could adapt to his mantra and the positions they needed to play to be at their most devastating best. Vidal became the fulcrum of the national side, chasing, tackling, defending, creating, passing and doing everything that was expected of him and much, much more. Sanchez was the knife point, driving all attacks out towards the flanks, which is why they became such a good side to watch (let alone follow!). There only weakness was their defence (does this sound familiar at all?) so he set up a 3-3-1-3 to counter teams that could hit them on fast counters, which is why they became so reliant on their defensive midfielders mopping up any quick breaks from the back. Small note - traditionally South American teams do not play counter attacking football, but a game built around possession. Bielsa not just revolutionised the game in Chile and South America but his approach started to spread to Europe.
Now trying to take that kind of football to Liverpool you can see that Rodgers came close to replicating this system with Luis Suarez in our side last season. In fact we had someone better than Alexis Sanchez driving our attacks and pressing our forward line in that similar mould. Our midfield last year also pressed as hard as Chile’s midfield did under Bielsa, Henderson has the same tank as Vidal but unfortunately is not as accomplished as him. Sterling, Coutinho and Sturridge all excelled under this set-up as well. Not quite Bielsa’s Chile of 2007-2010 but Rodger’s tweaked it to maximum effect.
Where Rodger’s has become completely undone (and I have mentioned this to death) was allowing Suarez to go to Barcelona without bringing in Sanchez to replace him, or someone as equally as talented as him that could also bring that high intensity work-rate. Instead he brought in players like Lambert and Balotelli, WHO ARE COMPLETE POLAR OPPOSITES in terms of game style / fit. I actually have no problem with signing players like Lallana, Can and Markovic as I believe this was the right approach but where he differs in Bielsa is that he could not let go of the established players like Gerrard, Johnson, etc. He has tried to use them to stablise his starting XI, but in doing so completely destroyed / broken any game plan that he had to use his new players coming into side this season. In my eyes this is completely unacceptable, with the money and awareness that Suarez was leaving in July (if not even earlier) he had every chance to be “the one” that would take our club to the next level, instead he brought in the wrong players and had no plan B to counter Suarez’s departure.
Very good post and one of the best I've read for a while... what website did you steel it from Eds? I could do with a few of those myself
With regards to actual player style and quality this is something I've mentioned years ago. You have particular moulds of players. Players who do similar jobs, in certain ways and are suited to certain systems, styles and attributes of others within the game. Obviously a lot of players can adapt to different systems, some players can play in multiple, but you get others who can be quite specialised. To add to Eds post, I'll obviously try to use examples which are easier to understand at first before going into finer details which I personally believe to be cases of systems and styles not suiting players and attributes etc. One thing I am absolutely against is deciding a style before looking at the style of players and more importantly the quality. The most important things are to select a style which gets the best out of your best players and secondly accomadate the next level of players into that style or select and replace as fit.
This is something a lot of people do understand due to its simplicity but something I feel a lot of people look over, and I also know for a fact you get to many coaches who believe this, to not be a correct ideal, within the game and one reason that certain young players don't make it through youth ranks who are good enough due to them "not being able to play a particular style" or "carry out particular instructions". Talent and quality on the pitch will beat style and type a lot more often than not. Talent and quality are the two most important things, style and instructions can be adapted around these, it should NEVER be the other way round unless in extreme circumstances, the best managers and coaches usually are the ones who can spot these circumstances on the very rare occasions these happen. These instructions and lack of understanding at the lower levels of the game where some numpties claim to coach and play (who never do or have... and if they do are the exact reason the game fails in this country) are the reason you often get players no longer in the game at any level who are more than good enough to at least play in the lower leagues. Some even in the top leagues.
From personal experience I can also vouch for players (not for myself unfortunately as I was too good
) but who I would describe as more talented and better players than some of their fully professional counter parts. I've often played with midfielders in the past who've you've just stopped and thought.... (how the f*ck did they spot that pass) or you're thinking, pass it into the left channel... (they pass it right and open the game up) or a defender who you're thinking (where the f*ck did you just come from) or something along those lines and these little differences can and do make massive contributions to team fluidity, set up and even confidence to others. Attitudes and vision of others can influence weather you make that run, whether you think its worth it or not... At times this season, Coutinho and Sterling are looking lost because they aren't sure weather to stick or go, where as last season the answer was there... Suarez had the answer so they just cracked on and bang... it made them better more effective fluid players too. They still have the same qualities now, just not the same people doing the same things bringing them out.
Back to player moulds though, we all know players have attributes and qualities. I've often tried to stay away from football manager as an example as quite frankly, they get it wrong to often with players actually qualities and people often think that this means they know what they're talking about in real life. There is a muppet who uses this forum who compared Coutinho to Roberto Firminho due to this game and "scouts" all his players on there... but thats by the by... typical football manager who throw names into a hat based on fifa and the likes and think thats how real football works
However their database is closely linked to similar databases clubs all use (originally started by databases the top clubs used to keep on all players all over the world), the scouting network is all similar and individual players are attributed in much the same way and it is an acurate way to look at a player.
Now this particular system doesn't account for luck, situations that arise, weather and a whole host of other things that influence performance, but generally when you judge a player out of 20 for an attribute you are comparing him over 38 games to everyone else. So you may get Balotelli for example, who would have 8 or 9 work rate, run 50 yards to close someone down, then get up and do it again once, but that doesn't mean "he works hard" all the time etc, it just means he has it in him, you'd consider certain ratings over an average and such too, where as something like Pace, would be a bit more defined.
What it does, it makes an "opinion" on a player sort of a fact to an extent, it can make it easier to judge weather someone is better than someonen else. Its something I've always been very firm in my belief in over my time on the forum and in football, that its not a game of opinions. Opinions can't be wrong... you can't have a "definitive opinion" but you can have fact on who wins in football, it maybe based on an opinion of who is better, but the point is it is still a fact deep down. IE one player from Paul Scholes or Patrick Vieira is better than the other, Personally I'd take either, but its a fact that one is better than the other, the opinion comes into who is better, its nearly impossible to tell due to differing styles and contributions... but I still believe one to be better than the other. On something like that, you are splitting hairs, but when you get to bigger gaps I don't believe you are. For example, Fabregas for me is a terrific little player, always has been, always will be, but he'll never be as good as either of those two, good enough to compete, damn right, good enough to win a league against them with the right players around him, again too right... but not as good as either over 38 games. (Obviously I'm talking about all players at their peak).
On the context of opinion, I can sit their and say, I'm better than Patrick Vieira (similar style, obviously I'm better looking
) and couldn't be wrong, because its an opinion... when the reality is he's absolutely light years ahead of me in every attribute. That doesn't mean though, that I would never win a header, or a tackle, or turn him, or meg him, or skin him and smash one in the top corner.... just because he's miles ahead, the beauty of the game is that these things CAN happen... however unlikely... but what you'll find is over 38 games the bigger the gap in the "stated attributes" would obviously mean he'd get the better every time more or less.
However, the closer these attributes get, then the harder it becomes to judge.
Now when we talk about style its always important to consider all aspects. What a players role is, what you want them to get from others, where do you want them to perform certain tasks etc. IE you wouldn't give a centre half reading of the game 1 out of 20 and the same for pace then ask him defend on the half way line, just as you wouldn't ask Crouch to play in the same style as Owen. However, you may ask Gary Cahill or William Gallas to push right up as they have the pace and reading of the game and you may set your team up to create space for Owen to run into by playing deep... the other thing is with that though, is when you're picking a centre half, you need to take into consideration how he defends as that can influence your attack, IE, Gallas on the half way line trying to intercept a pass and Owen on the halfway line waiting for one leaves midfielders with Zero time and space to get their heads up so you're looking for through balls from defenders rather than midfielders... There are so many nuiances and little things that effect play, but I often feel the likes of Rodgers tries to over complicate it. Alex Ferguson, as much as I hate the t*at had it right, he sent his players out to do what they done best, he didn't ever over complicate stuff. This caused him problems in europe occasionally, but the man wasn't exactly a failiure in that respect either. Where as the likes of Benitez was probably more of an opposite at times...
What I believe Rodgers has done with Balotelli is just thought, he's quality, he'll have to increase his movement and work rate then bang he'll replace Suarez. He wants Balotelli to become a work rate and movement 20 player from a 10 in these attributes effectively and I've always maintained you can't make diamonds out of rubbish, this is what I'm talking about in a different extent, its exactly the same as asking Crouch to become a 20 pace player and 20 movement and Owen to become a Crouch style target man, you can't do that with players. It simply doesn't work. It doesn't work often when the gap is closer, sometimes, even when the players are similar dynamics can change so I have no idea why he thinks such a drastic change is even on the cards to be honest, it absolutely stinks...
He'd have been better with a player with a player like Craig Bellamy at his best than Balotelli for this. Bellers was a good player and although not in the same class as Luis his attributes and core attributes where the same. His determination, work rate, ability to run the channels and such were similar and also direct style. For me, Bellamy wasn't as a good footballer as Balotelli, but thats by the by at the moment. I think had we replaced Luis with a player of decent quality, like a Tevez, Sanchez, Bellamy in his pomp or someone of the mould, the style from last season and the intent of the team wouldn't have changed much. I believe no matter who we'd replaced Luis with, we'd have suffered, he's a class act, but as Eds said, we've replaced him with a polar opposite of a player.
For example, personally I'd give Luis a work rate attribute (meaning what pressure he'd instigate) of between 17-20 depending on his mood and again an "influenced work rate attribute" of 17-20... meaning if he seen someone else do it he'd have a go as well...
His work rate alone is a massive loss as... Mario I'd give probably an 8 or 9 for his original work rate... but an influenced attribute of 11-14, meaning if everyone else is doing it he'll put a shift in, and Danny 11-13 or an influenced attribute of 15 maybe on a good day. When I talk about an influenced attribute, its about a response to a teammate, IE, Jason McAteer will always tell you Robbie Fowler made him a better player, because McAteer knew he simply had to put the ball in the box, no hesitation, into a good area, then bang, he had an assist, its the same with a lot of attributes from vision, movement, decisions, attitude and work rate, they can all rub off on others. As I've said time and time again, someone like Luis who has all of these in abundance rubs off on everyone immensely and raises everyone games.
Luis movement was probably as good as I've ever seen also, I'd give the lad 19 or 20 on a bad day. Where as Mario, even at his best maybe a 12 or 13. These two factors alone make it impossible for Mario to replace Luis in the same system, which is what the manager has looked to do. Where as if you were to look at Sanchez, Tevez and Bellamy at their best they would be a lot closer in those attributes that are key to the style... basically at the moment, we're playing to Balotelli's weaknesses rather than his strengths, make no mistake though, Mario has has his own strengths and some f*cking good ones. This lad is a player, no two ways about it, a top player? Not so sure, but in terms of quality, anyone who thinks he has any is a tool. So far though, his contribution has been stiffled to death by Brendan and he's struggled big time.
Not to make this all about Mario and Luis (as it was the managers choice to rip apart the DNA of the team and "system" by doing this), because it isn't.
With moulds of players comes a responsibility from a manager to get the best out of them. Eds mentioned Henderson had the same work ethic as Vidal in his post, again, something I have no problem with agreeing with, however, his overall quality is nowhere near sufficient to define a teams style of play in the same way. Not even close, Vidal is a player who can define a style of play, he's that good. I've often slagged off Henderson during the past, but last season, he shown given the right surroundings he's more than useful. He was a very good cog in a machine which suited him perfectly. This season however, with the changes around him he's back to his inconsistent and sometimes annonymous self struggling to know what to do. He's another one who's failing to know weather to stick or twist due to the lack of leadership and work ethic ahead of him and you can see its causing massive frustration in his game leading to a lack of concentration and confidence which were not their last season. Henderson was once refered too on here as the second best midfielder in the league by a complete joke of a character, when the reality is he's nothing more than a decent premier league player who could be replaced by many players, especially since the sale of Luis Suarez who would improve us. Had we kept Suarez, Henderson wouldn't have been one of the first names I'd be looking to replace, now Luis is gone, he would be.
What we need to do now is change tact completely. This side, in terms of talent going forward and ability is massively under acheiving at the moment and there is only one man to blame and tactically its simply a shambles.
Luis Suarez has gone, we cannot continue to attempt this poor effort at the football that lad left behind. Firstly, if it was me, and I don't like the idea of Coutihno playing from the left, but thats where he'd play for me now. Sterling from the right, Sturridge and Balotelli up top and go back to a 4-4-2 with wide players who'll do damage, I'd also get us playing on the counter rather than trying "death by football" and all that bollox...
Mario is excellent at coming deep and recieving a ball and holding players off, Coutinho can see a pass with a blindfold on and Sturridge and Sterling have the quality and speed to get in behind anyone. Mario is also no slouch and if we can get the ball ahead of him, it would allow him to run onto attacks from deep which he is much better than we've seen so far... I would also leave Henderson out for Allen in terms of trying to find a balance and finding the right moulds and combinations. Maybe even try Lallana as an authodox centre mid... or even Coutinho.... Also I believe by playing a deeper and less expressive game we would tighten up at the back while still remaining massively dangerous on the break. With Allen and Lucas in central midfield we'd probably lack physicallity but thats sometihng I'd be willing to risk at the moment due to finding other components that will start to work.
Personally at the moment:
Sturridge Balotelli
Coutinho Sterling
Allen +1
Enrique Agger Lovren Manquillo
Reina
( £5,000,000 ) received for Agger and Reina...
another story...
(Mignolet and Sahko probably instead) but thats what I'd go with, I'd be looking to replace Sahko and Mignolet with imediate effect and strengthening the midfield duo (with Southamptons pair, may as well sign all their players)
Rodgers has royally f*cked up this squads balance, his lack of quality signings and his lack of vision has wound me up immensely and his lack of signing Remy plus one or two others has too. But the reality is the squad isn't all that bad, its just we have a bit of a chump managing it at the moment.
The front four alone, lacking Suarez, is still pretty impressive. Coutinho and Sterling would be there or their abouts in the top teams as would Mario and Sturridge, I don't think any of them would be regulars and main players, but they are all good enough to contribute to clubs in that aspect. There is no reason, that playing to our strengths, we still couldn't score 70 odd league goals with those lads as the front four. Conceding 30 and scoring 70 is roughly around what Rafa's best sides used to do. The goal difference is still around the 40 mark which you need to be hitting to be looking at being able to challenge for a league title. We would obviously need to tighten up at the back, but coming with playing a more defensive shape you'd get that anyway and I also think the more defensive shape and depth would allow our better attacking players the more space and time they would need to do the damage.
[1].gif)
by 