Liverpool FC Forum

[aCe']

Apart from you mentioning pushing Gerrard forward its crystal clear you're one of the few people on here who truely understands the game.

Excellent post.

With Coutinho being injured and me almost completely giving up on Aspas 4 games in, there's a spot or two in the starting 11 to be filled (even if we assume Moses will start). My worry is that further up the pitch, without Coutinho and Suarez, its hard to see where the creativity, vision and flair will come from. So yes, if it comes down to it, I'd consider the area in most need when deciding on where our best player will operate regardless of whether its his best position or not. We'll miss his influence in the middle of the park but he has the awareness to run the show from different positions on the pitch.

Assuming we lineup like this:

                              Mignolet
Toure          Skrtel          Agger          Enrique

                  Gerrard       Lucas

XXX                         XXX                      XXX
                         
                           Sturridge


Moses/Aspas/Allen/Alberto/Henderson/Sterling will most likely be the options for the 3 open spots. For me, Moses, Allen, and Sterling deserve a chance to show what they can offer. My concern is that with 3, we'll have width and a bit of directness but not much else in terms of culture. You could make a case for Aspas ahead of Allen but he'll need to up his game a few levels to make a believer out of me. Between Allen, Gerrard and Lucas, I know who'd be the one causing the biggest danger to opposition pushing forward.

[RED BEERGOGGLES]

It seems removing Gerrard is not a popular opinion ,nevertheless it is one I believe that would bear fruit eventually . Its no secret that leaving
Gerrard on for the 90 minutes is a complete head scratcher for most fans,I just think Gerrard offers very little as a defensive mid when this
worrying(but completely understandable given his age ) onset of fatigue takes hold.

I just believe mixing it up and making us more combative in the middle ,whilst introducing a more attack minded player to work the flanks would
offer us far more than what Gerrard is currently contributing to the second half. As for Gerrard making more interceptions and tackles than Lucas
in the second half ,with the best will and intentions in the world, this is at best imaginative to say the least.

Steven Gerrard is a great player and can still carry a game for possibly 50/60 minutes ,but suggesting his flagging energy levels do not aid and abet
our sudden demise as an attacking unit of any real potency ,then you're probably viewing the game through a kaleidoscope.

Its simply not practical playing Gerrard for the full 90 ,the fans know this ,so while Rodgers retains his rather dogmatic assertions that Gerrard is still a
major influence on the outcome of these games and insists he plays the full 90 mins ,the Kop sit nonplussed.

[RedAnt]

A agree mostly with what Ace says, but two notes:

A Mascha-esque midfielder can work very well in a possession game. Simple passing, high energy/aggression, and a good reading of the game means he can sit in front of the CB's in almost a midfield sweeper role allowing the rest of the team, especially alternating full backs, focus on possession up the field. It can work with the right players.

As for physicality, I'd say its an issue in the second half due to us being in front and the opposition playing much more aggressively after half time. We simply don't have the muscle to cope. Our passing and movement needs to be very tight to play our way out of pressure. When opponents are in our face, players panic. Lucas gets carded then goes missing. We hoof the ball out of defense for Aspas and Courhino to contend.

[RedAnt]

In Gerrard, gotta say I just can't see a LFC team without him. But he must be knackered. I'd certainly agree with going a bit easier on him.

[Benny The Noon]

The team isn't a physically strong or combative team - BR seems intent on filling the forward/midfield roles with small technical players just like Barce have but they have a very powerful physical player in Busquets who provides the steal for the team. Also players like Messi/Iniesta etc have developed very good physical strength to be able to hold off players and not get pushed around.

Look at the majority of BR's signings - Allen, Borini , Aspas , Alberto , Coutinho , Sturridge - only Sturridge has strength on the ball - the rest seem to get "bullied" and pushed off the ball . Need another player in the middle of the park to provide some strength and power and steal to help the team get more control in the middle.

When De Guzman came on he helped Swansea get a grip on the middle of the park be being able to push players like Aspas around.

[supersub]

It seems removing Gerrard is not a popular opinion ,nevertheless it is one I believe that would bear fruit eventually . Its no secret that leaving
Gerrard on for the 90 minutes is a complete head scratcher for most fans,I just think Gerrard offers very little as a defensive mid when this
worrying(but completely understandable given his age ) onset of fatigue takes hold.

I just believe mixing it up and making us more combative in the middle ,whilst introducing a more attack minded player to work the flanks would
offer us far more than what Gerrard is currently contributing to the second half. As for Gerrard making more interceptions and tackles than Lucas
in the second half ,with the best will and intentions in the world, this is at best imaginative to say the least.

Steven Gerrard is a great player and can still carry a game for possibly 50/60 minutes ,but suggesting his flagging energy levels do not aid and abet
our sudden demise as an attacking unit of any real potency ,then you're probably viewing the game through a kaleidoscope.

Its simply not practical playing Gerrard for the full 90 ,the fans know this ,so while Rodgers retains his rather dogmatic assertions that Gerrard is still a
major influence on the outcome of these games and insists he plays the full 90 mins ,the Kop sit nonplussed.

[Benny The Noon]

Would have no problems playing Gerrard less - the only problem is we dont have anyone in the squad who can do a better job than him - even when he is running on empty. If we had bought a big powerful CM then Gerrard could have played less minutes.

[JC_81]

I think it's a no brainer that our second half collapses and our midfield problems are intrinsically linked.

I don't believe that this has been tactical, apart from perhaps the Villa game.  It certainly wasn't tactical against Swansea.  The midfield, as many have pointed out, simply doesn't have the gas to play a pressing game for 90 mins.  Although I agree that Gerrard is struggling for a full 90, I don't think Lucas is mobile or athletic enough for this style either.  The other holding option, Allen, impressed me when he first arrived, but after a dip in form he's struggled to get it back and I do wonder if he's tough enough mentally to make it at a big club.  Gerrard is still the best of the three by some way, even when tiring due to his ability to hit a long pass into the striker or channel to ease pressure on us.  The disappointing thing for me is that most fans identified the lack of an athletic, physical presence in midfield last season and Rodgers didn't try and address it.  Instead we spent 25 million on two centre backs on deadline day when we only needed one.  Even Cissokho was unnecessary as Sakho can provide left back cover too.

A second theory would be whether the fitness of the squad is up to scratch.  It is well documented that all of Rodgers' pre-season work was with the ball.  When you look at some of our second half performances you do wonder whether a bit more stamina training in the pre-season would have helped.  At 33 Gerrard has an excuse to tire second half, the rest of them (bar Sturridge who clearly is carrying injury and missed pre-season) don't.  It wasn't just Gerrard and Sturridge who looked knackered at Swansea. 

If we are going to persist with this game plan of coming out of the traps fast and trying to press teams into submission first half then we are going to have to take our chances when on top, because it's blatantly obvious we can't keep it up for 90 and we'll end up dropping deeper and deeper inviting pressure as the game goes on.  This tactic isn't new - Benitez used it to good effect in first halves against teams all the time (see Juve in CL at Anfield 2005 for a great example).  The difference is that was a team that was also built to absorb pressure once we got our noses in front.  I fear that over a season this team can't do that.

Still, we're top of the league so we can't be that bad!  Room for improvement tough.

[supersub]

Apart from you mentioning pushing Gerrard forward its crystal clear you're one of the few people on here who truely understands the game.

Excellent post.

disagree...the most accurate assessment is by redbeergoggles...no blinkers

[Stu the Red]

we sit deep in the second half because our center mids havent got the athleticism to get up and down the pitch like they do in the first half!
in the first half our center mids support our forwards (even getting in the opposition box) and when the opposition attack they get back and help the defence, come the second half though they havent got the energy to do both jobs so the stay back.
one one occassion on monday moses counter attacked down the wing towards the halfway line with the ball and about 3 or 4 swansea players swarmed to him like a horde of angry bee`s, moses looked around for support and no red shirt was within 40 yards of him, everyone was standing at the edge of our area watching him trying to take the entire swansea team on on his own!
the swansea midfield were full of energy and chased everything down in numbers with enthusiasm whilst we did our usually second half impression of colonel travis and davey crockett defending the alamo.
gerrard and lucas dont want to push up the pitch in the second half because they know if the other team counter attacked they`d struggle to get back goal side, everyone must have noticed how players just run straight through the heart of our midfield sometimes, just breezing past gerrard and lucas.

Sorry I don't buy that for a second. Carrick and Cleverly are certainly not what I would call athletic and neither have the physical ability that Gerrard still has, even at 32/33. Let alone the physical ability he used to possess.

The example you used with moses, bearing in mind I can't think of the incident off the top of my head would then point to Moses lacking the game intelligence to hold the ball up rather than Gerrard (and I say Gerrard, because Lucas wouldn't support anyway) "not being able to keep up".

Gerrard is not the problem in this Liverpool side, its the lack of quality around that is. Even at his age I can absolutely cast iron guarentee there isn't a manager in the league who wouldn't play him every game if they had him. He would still get into EVERY SIDE in the league and improve it.

[metalhead]

It seems removing Gerrard is not a popular opinion ,nevertheless it is one I believe that would bear fruit eventually . Its no secret that leaving
Gerrard on for the 90 minutes is a complete head scratcher for most fans,I just think Gerrard offers very little as a defensive mid when this
worrying(but completely understandable given his age ) onset of fatigue takes hold.

I just believe mixing it up and making us more combative in the middle ,whilst introducing a more attack minded player to work the flanks would
offer us far more than what Gerrard is currently contributing to the second half. As for Gerrard making more interceptions and tackles than Lucas
in the second half ,with the best will and intentions in the world, this is at best imaginative to say the least.

Steven Gerrard is a great player and can still carry a game for possibly 50/60 minutes ,but suggesting his flagging energy levels do not aid and abet
our sudden demise as an attacking unit of any real potency ,then you're probably viewing the game through a kaleidoscope.

Its simply not practical playing Gerrard for the full 90 ,the fans know this ,so while Rodgers retains his rather dogmatic assertions that Gerrard is still a
major influence on the outcome of these games and insists he plays the full 90 mins ,the Kop sit nonplussed.

I'm sorry mate, but I absolutely disagree with you about Gerrard, I think it won't bear fruit taking him off the team because we would badly miss him. He still influences the game, even for 90 minutes, he carried Lucas against Aston Villa by saving his @rse a couple of times (especially one world class tackle to block a shot away) He still makes surging runs, contributes in attack and gets shot in. Please watch this video against the Mancs, and skip through the part he gets a tackle in against Welbeck, that's just absolutely world class from him http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYz7BBxg0hA.

[Kenny Kan]

Here's something to be considered. I think Gerrard has been doing more defensively than many seem to give him credit for. I think at times, he carries Lucas and is the one bursting a gut to get on the other side of a running midfielder. For me, as a manager, if you're concerned about the stamina of your central midfielders then you try to get a hold of the ball rather than sit back and invite pressure and give your holding midfielders more running to do. It's common sense. I dont buy for a second that Rodgers would want us playing the counter home and away in the second half of games. It's nonsense and bad management on his part whether he said he did it intentionally or not. It has cost us two points and we were lucky it didnt cost us more. Outisde Moses and the largely ineffective Sterling, we dont have much pace in the side. Our tempo is too slow and our players without Suarez (or Gerrard playing further up) arent suited to that system. Possession has become our beread and butter and the only alternative option we have in the side is Victor Moses. He isnt a top quality player and he's unlikely to be a major influence in the game but he offers something different. You look at all the side competing for a top4 spot and they all have different options and different systems/tactics that they can use within games. We desperately lack in that department. It was very obvious against Swansea that in the second half, they pushed their backline further up and made some tactical changes that Rodgers couldnt respond to. Whether its the personnel or the tactics that were the problem is irrelevant, the fact remains that for the 5th game (4th league) in a row, we fail to adjust to changes made by the opposition.

I think Gerrard on the bench in any game is a recipe for disaster. To some extent, same could be said about Coutinho. Gerrard's passing creates chances from deeper and Coutinho's dribbling and vision give us an outlet further up the pitch where the ball isn't lost right away. Both are vital especially given our deficiencies. What I would recommend is players like Aspas and Henderson making way. Both do very little in attacking terms when we dont have possession and I'd much rather have Moses and Allen/Alberto in there attempting something different.

Rubbish.

The point that trumps your "bad management" is the fact we're sitting top of the league and have only dropped 2pts from 15 and have had the best start to the league in years. Hardly bad management.

Why wouldn't Rodgers play counter attacking home or away? When Houllier did it, Rafa did it and so does Mourinho to an extent.

In 5 games now we have gone into half time leading the game, he's taken a leaf out of Mourniho's book and wants to make us a hard team to beat. We were too expansive at times last season and lost points and games because as a team we were opened up, huge gaps between midfield and defense. I'm glad to see he's tried to address this, bad management it's not.

[Kenny Kan]

I love how last season and the season before that, when we couldn't beat our opponents either because their goalie was MOTM or we hit the post a 100 times or the ref made a bad decision against us, people were saying how it's not down to luck but that we lack bottle or don't have the mentality to keep a lead or break the opposition. Now, when we're getting the results but with somewhat questionable approach and performance by the players, people are saying that we're winning because of luck . I know that the comments about our previous seasons were made after the whole season ended and at the moment we've played just 4 games, but I think that the lads and Rodgers deserve a little bit more credit for being on top of the table instead of rubbishing our results and saying it's all down to luck.

You couldn't make it up could you.

well said.

[aCe']

Here's something to be considered. I think Gerrard has been doing more defensively than many seem to give him credit for. I think at times, he carries Lucas and is the one bursting a gut to get on the other side of a running midfielder. For me, as a manager, if you're concerned about the stamina of your central midfielders then you try to get a hold of the ball rather than sit back and invite pressure and give your holding midfielders more running to do. It's common sense. I dont buy for a second that Rodgers would want us playing the counter home and away in the second half of games. It's nonsense and bad management on his part whether he said he did it intentionally or not. It has cost us two points and we were lucky it didnt cost us more. Outisde Moses and the largely ineffective Sterling, we dont have much pace in the side. Our tempo is too slow and our players without Suarez (or Gerrard playing further up) arent suited to that system. Possession has become our beread and butter and the only alternative option we have in the side is Victor Moses. He isnt a top quality player and he's unlikely to be a major influence in the game but he offers something different. You look at all the side competing for a top4 spot and they all have different options and different systems/tactics that they can use within games. We desperately lack in that department. It was very obvious against Swansea that in the second half, they pushed their backline further up and made some tactical changes that Rodgers couldnt respond to. Whether its the personnel or the tactics that were the problem is irrelevant, the fact remains that for the 5th game (4th league) in a row, we fail to adjust to changes made by the opposition.

I think Gerrard on the bench in any game is a recipe for disaster. To some extent, same could be said about Coutinho. Gerrard's passing creates chances from deeper and Coutinho's dribbling and vision give us an outlet further up the pitch where the ball isn't lost right away. Both are vital especially given our deficiencies. What I would recommend is players like Aspas and Henderson making way. Both do very little in attacking terms when we dont have possession and I'd much rather have Moses and Allen/Alberto in there attempting something different.

Rubbish.

The point that trumps your "bad management" is the fact we're sitting top of the league and have only dropped 2pts from 15. Hardly bad management.

In 5 games now we have gone into half time leading the game, he's taken a leaf out of Mourniho's book and wants to make us a hard team to beat. We were too expansive at times last season and lost points and games because as a team we were opened up, huge gaps between midfield and defense. I'm glad to see he's tried to address this, bad management it's not.

Well, you might have a point but if thats the 'strategy' that the manager is going for then I think it's a terrible one and one that wont take us far. We're 4 games into the season and the 'we're top of the league' argument despite it being a fact isn't one that I believe we should be overemphasizing at such an early stage. Long may it continue, but it doesnt mean that there isnt work to be done to ensure it doesnt go to waste.

The thing is, Lucas is the player who has the most touches in the side. He's not a creative player, not particularly good in tight areas, not good at passing it long (which seems to be a good thing going by what some are suggesting). Add to that the fact that we have no wingers in the side. No width and no pace. The players we have further up the pitch include Henderson and Aspas. Both have contributed precious little and in Henderson's case he seems to convert to a fullback role in the second half. So just to recap, thats limited supply from the middle and no width/pace in the side.

With no counter attacking plan or players to implement, why would we be doing it intentionally ?

You mention Mourinho, but fail to acknowledge the fact that he's had some of the best players in the world (down both ends of the pitch) implementing his strategy at the various clubs hes been at. It's not that hard or surprising (given the APPROPRIATE fixture) to play on the counter when you have the likes of Ronaldo, Di Maria, Ozil (Madrid), Sneijder, Etoo, Millito (Inter), Robben, Cole, Drogba (Chelsea).

[Kenny Kan]

So let me get this straight, it's feasible that teams like Stoke, Villa and Swansea can dominate an entire second half without the famous buzzword of having "world class" players in their side; their manager just has to tinker the tactics and have us on the back foot just like that. But it isn't feasible that Rodgers looks to protect a lead and contain a side then look to hit them on the break? Sorry, not having that, I think that's absolute poppyc*ck.

As I said, Rafa did it and Houllier did it too, you just plucked Maureen out of that but it could be argued he's the exception not the norm given the quality of players he has at his disposal to play this tactic. You need to remember, other managers use this tactic without having the necessary "world class" players in their team. I honestly didn't realise you had to have "world class" players just to play counter attacking football. I thought world class players would boss a game entirely without having to rely on CA football. 

The only player who had the pace to exploit defenders in Houllier's team was Owen, knock a long ball down the channel and that was pretty much it, Heskey, Berger, Murphy weren't "world class", Hamman was class but not as a creative player, the only other player apart from Owen (who was "world class" at the time) was Gerrard - hardly an entire team of "World class" talent. When Sturridge is fit, he'll run those channels, with players like Sterling and Moses and even the running of Henderson could do this, so, I wouldn't be so quick to write this this tactic off.

I think it was Skertel after the Man.U game said 'we've been working on our defensive game all pre-season', given this and Rodgers's comments after the Villa game, along with the displays we've seen, I think it's a safer bet to conclude that this is what Rodgers is looking for - more steal to the team because last season we were very prone to conceding very soft goals through the middle. Largely because there were acres of space between our midfield and defense - due to the expansive approach we took. On top of this (and this is my theory now) we don't have the most mobile midfield in Lucas and Gerrard (something you also disagreed with me IIRC in the 'Midfield a concern or not' thread), and I think Rodgers is also accommodating this factor into the tactic. Midfield is our weakest link (IMO for a number of reasons), so to protect this he might not want them exposed by space, where like last season the opposition found enough room between midfield and defense to park a jumbo jet. They couldn't recover adequately so he may have turned this weakness into a strength, at the cost of fluidity and possession up top. Now, he may redefine how he wants his forwards to play in this system and considering they weren't, or aren't a weak link he may feel this would benefit the team as a WHOLE.

So, all in all, his management has worked thus far, it still needs tinkering but it shows Rodgers is adapting accordingly and I think he is working on trying to find the right balance.

I hope we go in at HT 0-0 against Soton at the weekend to disprove your theory of the opposition pushing a higher line up and opposing managers tinkering their sides with barely any "world class" players in them in order for them to come out into the second half and totally dominate us. When it's been us that have dropped deeper and have changed the ebb and flow of the game, just so we can see that this team are able to go toe to toe with the mighty Soton in the second half.