Liverpool FC Forum

[bigmick]

I don't think that that is a sensible way to read the figures at all Sabes to be perfectly honest. Since the last International break we played Cardiff in the Carling Cup, making nine changes for the game, using players such as Itanje, El Zahr and Hobbs. In the very next match, we made eight changes (to effectiverly change the team back into a sensible one.) There's seventeen of your twenty four changes right there since the last International break.

In my opinion, it is impossible to look at the number and nature of changes game by game and come to any other conclusion that there has been and continues to be a significant reduction in the number of rotations. Put it this way, if we were playing Portsmouth away next weekend does anybody seriously think we would rest/rotate both Gerrard and Torres? Come to that, any Away game against anyone in the Premiership right now, would Torres get rested/rotated?

No, we are into the serious business of having to win a lot of football matches right now. My only hope is that our early season silliness (in my opinion of course) where we rotated ourselves into dizziness, hasn't lost us too much ground on the leaders. As I've said a couple of times, though the gap doesn't look big in points terms, we have given ourselves an absolute mountain to climb given our easy run of fixtures.

[bigmick]

On St Mike's interesting take on the subject. I actually think I fall into both of the last two categories. I would assume, in fact I'm certain that the manager doesn't just change the team to be a "smart erse", that would be a silly thing to say.

I'm sure he believes that if he rotates he keeps players fresher than if he doesn't (and in all seriousness he proabably succeeds), and equally I'm sure he thinks that if he rotates they have less chance of getting injured (more marginal this one given our run this season, my take would be that it makes next to no difference).

All the way through the debate, both sides can prove their point on most aspects by referring to extremes. If for instance, Gerrard played every minute of every single game (and please remember that nobody is suggesting that he should), then obviously he wouldn't be as fresh as if he missed one game in five to have a rest. It's obvious. Equally, if he played every minute of every single game he would have more chance of getting injured than he would if he sat on his erse one in five. That much is obvious too (a bit like saying if you crossed 100 roads every day you've got more chance of getting run over than someone who never leaves the house).

What if though, rather than missing one game in five (and please, I KNOW Gerrard doesn't actually miss one game in five) you missed one game in ten? Would there be much difference then? What about one game in fifteen? It's all a question of degree. Obviously one game against Man Utd would take more out of you than a 6-0 stroll at Home to Derby, so that needs to be considered as well.

Then there's the question of the team as whole. Sorry to go on about it yet again, but what about the balance, the rhythm, the cohesion of the unit while we're resting all these players. We had a silly season on the subject earlier in the season where one or two people claimed it had absolutely zero effect, zip, nada if you changed half the team every game. Unbelieveable I know but they know who they are      What about the team unit?

So clearly there are lot of factors to consider. It pleases me that despite being sick to the back teeth of the debate, despite finding it sooo boring two days ago St Mike has decided to revisit it because it is without any question at all THE most important subject with regards the success of the team under Rafa.

A couple of questions. Firstly, if football has changed quite so much (and it has), why don't all the managers of the other big four clubs rotate in the same way that Rafa does? I assume that everybody would accept that we rotate more than Manchester United, Arsenal and Chelsea? This is even allowing for the fact that they will catch us up a bit now they have momentum going, have qualified in the Champions League and have engineered a situation where teams like Reading, even when at Home as against Arsenal the other night, get every single player behind the ball and try and eke out a draw. No, they'll be rotating more than us for a while now, while we are pretty much bound to play our strongest available team in every game because we've put ourselves behind the eight ball.

As for the bit about the squad, and I'm referring to the league position here, benefitting from the rotation policy, I just want to check again as the season progresses. When? The pro-Rafa, pro rotationers, pro-get some coaching badges, pro don't be fickle, pro don't be an Andy Gray follower stuck their flags to the mast earlier in the season (and fair play to them for that), just making sure that it's still there?

Mine is still stuck to the mast. No team will ever win or come close to winning (not within six points is about close enough) the English Premier League while employing mass rotation of players, positions, formations and tactics the way that Rafa has/does.

I would go further as an add on. Before we get involved in discussing next season, and I've made this clear for some time now, I would be asking rafa some very serious questions about the way he intends to approach the subject of team selection. If he intends changing the team 75 times in the first 15 games or whatever the feck it was next season as well, I'd shake his hand and say thanks very much but we'll call it quits. Whilstr employing such a rotational policy we are just wasting time in my view.

[LFC2007]

This is what an international break does to the forum.

[account deleted by request]

So clearly there are lot of factors to consider. It pleases me that despite being sick to the back teeth of the debate, despite finding it sooo boring two days ago St Mike has decided to revisit it because it is without any question at all THE most important subject with regards the success of the team under Rafa.

I think Lebron on The Liverpool Way Forum has something to do with that 

FFS just add a credit Stmike.

[Sabre]

Fair enough your comment about reading unproperly the numbers bigmick, the truth was that it was a first reaction, didn't analyse it deeply enough. So in this tiny period of time, we can argue yes, that's there's a slight less amount of rotation, and that the results have been better. Still, not my previous read of the numbers nor this one is conclusive, time will tell.

As for the bit about the squad, and I'm referring to the league position here, benefitting from the rotation policy, I just want to check again as the season progresses. When? The pro-Rafa, pro rotationers, pro-get some coaching badges, pro don't be fickle, pro don't be an Andy Gray follower stuck their flags to the mast earlier in the season (and fair play to them for that), just making sure that it's still there?

<tongue in cheek>
Yes, the vessel is still here, and the flag is up and waving. As you know we have a limited in numbers crew in the vessel of rotation believers as we speak, but it's still floating. We have intelligence reports though that tell us that if we win the next two matches and especially the game against United -- which is not in the realms of impossible -- we'll have to attend houndreds of shipwrecked persons who will want to join our vessel
</tongue in cheek>

[bigmick]

the vessel is still here, and the flag is up and waving. As you know we have a limited in numbers crew in the vessel of rotation believers as we speak, but it's still floating. We have intelligence reports though that tell us that if we win the next two matches and especially the game against United -- which is not in the realms of impossible -- we'll have to attend houndreds of shipwrecked persons who will want to join our vessel
</tongue in cheek>

Well it's not just the obvious reasons that I want us to prosper that I hope we win those games. The anti-rotation bandwagon was already getting pretty full, then some fecker had the bright idea of putting "Rafa-style mass" in between "anti" and "rotation". Feck me it's standing room only now, it's getting ridiculous. 

Once we started letting people on with their "keep rotation sensible" tee-shirts on, it all just went off. Now we've got the "Crouchie must play, I've never slagged him off even once" club trying to get in but feck 'em. Luckily for me I'm up the front driving the thing, poor ol' Peewee is down the back with Bamaga trying to control the masses   

Mind you Peewee's handed his notice in anyhow. His "Kuyt isn't good enough for a club like Liverpool" club has got quite popular too now.

At least you'll be able to strech out a bit on the deck of the good ship Three Are's Sabes (Rest, Rotate, Revolve). Like you though, my suspicion is that before long you'll come back into fashion and I can kick a few of these freeloaders off the train   

[Bad Bob]

I don't think that that is a sensible way to read the figures at all Sabes to be perfectly honest. Since the last International break we played Cardiff in the Carling Cup, making nine changes for the game, using players such as Itanje, El Zahr and Hobbs. In the very next match, we made eight changes (to effectiverly change the team back into a sensible one.) There's seventeen of your twenty four changes right there since the last International break.

While that's certainly true, Mick it also happened when we played Reading in the Carling Cup, between the first and second international breaks.  On that occasion, Rafa made 9 changes from the team that faced Birmingham and then made seven changes to the team that faced Wigan a few days later.  And, FWIW, it also happened before the first international break, when we played Toulouse away and home.  On both of those occasions, Rafa brought in six new faces for the Toulouse match and then made 5 changes to the line-up for the subsequent league match.   Basically, he treated Toulouse like a Carling Cup opponent and the results seemed to vindicate that approach.  So, no matter which 'phase' of the season we look at, the majority of Rafa's rotations have been focused on bringing squad players in to face weak opponents in a particular cup tie while restoring a more familiar line-up for the subsequent league match.

In my opinion, it is impossible to look at the number and nature of changes game by game and come to any other conclusion that there has been and continues to be a significant reduction in the number of rotations.

If we look at the three phases of the season I outlined in an earlier post, the raw numbers marginally bear you out Mick.  That is, we made 25 unforced changes in the 6 games of Phase A (start of season to 1st int'l break), 29 changes in the 7 games of Phase B (1st int'l break to 2nd int'l) break and 24 changes in the 7 games of Phase C (2nd break to today).  Based on these raw numbers, it look likes Rafa's rotating peaked in between the first and second international breaks--right at the time we were struggling greatly  and were managing only a lot of draws against lesser teams.  Since the 2nd international break, it would seem that--Carling Cup aside--Rafa has cut way back on the rotating (with, what is for some, a corresponding upturn of results).

Ah, but here's where it gets interesting.  If we look more closely at the rotations made in Phases B and C, we'll see a similar pattern:

Phase B
Opponent            Unforced Changes
                          From Last Match
Portsmouth                    ---
Porto                             2
Birmingham                      2
Reading                          9
Wigan                            7
Marseille                         4
Tottenham                      5

Phase C

Everton                         ---
Besiktas                         2
Arsenal                          1
Cardiff                           9
Blackburn                       8
Besiktas                         4
Fulham                           0

Now those numbers look pretty similar to me with the exception of the last one.  That discrepancy, of course, is due to the vastly different results of the CL match in question.  We played terribly against Marseille and so Rafa rightly decided to shake up the team quite a bit for the Spurs match.  Conversely, we mullered Besiktas and so Rafa, again quite rightly (albeit uncharacteristically) decided to name an unchanged team against Fulham.  So, those numbers to me offer pretty solid proof that Rafa has decidedly not cut back on his rotating in response to sub-par performances.  A fact that, as Sabre points out, is all the more remarkable given the injury issues we've faced for the past month.

Put it this way, if we were playing Portsmouth away next weekend does anybody seriously think we would rest/rotate both Gerrard and Torres? Come to that, any Away game against anyone in the Premiership right now, would Torres get rested/rotated?

Probably not but we're not playing them next week.  We had the misfortune of playing them at Saturday lunchtime following a two week international break and no amount of what-ifing will change the circumstances on the day: Gerrard was well short of match fitness (by his own admission) for the Portsmouth match and that Torres had traveled and was carrying a slight knock.  Hindsight seems to be 20/20 in this case but it bears repeating that there is absolutely no guarantee that Torres would have ensured a win that day.  Hell, suppose he had limped off at half time, as he did against Arsenal and had to miss the next three matches?  Would it have been worth it?  Personally, I'd still take the point.

What I detect here is a subtle shift from a discussion of the numbers associated with "Rafa-style mass" rotation to a discussion of particular selection decisions for particular games.  But, that's a different debate, is it not?  People point to the Portsmouth game and Birmingham games as the critical period where the momentum was lost and rotation is blamed for this.  But, let's be clear.  Rotation was not an issue with the Portsmouth game because it makes no sense to compare the line-up against Derby and the line-up against Portsmouth when a two-week international break is sandwiched in between.  That's why I started over in totting up the unforced changes at the beginning of each phase.  Moreover, Rafa only made 2 changes between the Porto game and the Birmingham game--hardly mass rotation.  So, I suspect it wasn't rotation per se that was the issue during this critical period but plain old team selection.  Rafa opted to leave his most gifted striker on the bench for two games and we dropped points.  If we look at it that way, maybe we can stop treating Rafa like the kooky Spaniard with the strange ideas and put him right back alongside other top managers who also, on occasion, drop key players and pay the price for it (I seem to recall Wenger resting Henry at Old Trafford last season, for instance).

No, we are into the serious business of having to win a lot of football matches right now. My only hope is that our early season silliness (in my opinion of course) where we rotated ourselves into dizziness, hasn't lost us too much ground on the leaders. As I've said a couple of times, though the gap doesn't look big in points terms, we have given ourselves an absolute mountain to climb given our easy run of fixtures.

This I agree with...we have made our work a lot harder given our indifferent results through that 'easy' stretch in our schedule.  As ever, though, I maintain that rotation is only one amongst a number of factors that had an impact on our form.

[bigmick]

As always Bob, an excellent and extremely thought provoking contribution. As you say, if you disregard the Carling Cup changes (which I think is sensible) then the numbers are not too disimilar. Disimilar they are though, in phase B there were 13 changes in the four games not including Carling Cup, and in phase C there were seven.

Now you could make the point (and no doubt somebody will before long) that it is only the fact that Rafa didn't rotate in the last game that has skewed the figures somewhat, and they may be right. I would also point out though that despite keeping the identical team for the second league game of the season which we played in the first, we still managed to rack up more changes in that period A than we have since (jeez there's no wonder people get bored of this stuff). I would also point out that the first game in period B saw a much more wayward selection away to Portsmouth than did the first game of C, Away to Everton. Although for the process of comparison we counted them as zero, there is no question the selection at Portsmouth was more "rotational" in its nature.

It's probably important to consider while I'm debating this that in no way shape or form am I attributing a reduction in our rotations to be playing a huge part in our upturn in form. If it has had any effect whasoever (and this is assuming for the purposes of discussion that I'm right and Rafa has belatedly decided to cut down on the rotation somewhat) then it will have been marginal at best.

Pro Rafa-style rotationers are quick to point out that rotation is not the sole reason for dips in form, bad results etc and they are right. Similarly, just because we are rotating less it would be extreme folly to expect the team to immediately play well. If Rafa continues to play a largely settled team our form will improve, of course I'm certain of that, but it will take a few matches to be noticeable and attributable to the consistency of selection.

This is precisely why I advocated playing the same team against Fulham which played against Besiktas. We were going to beat Fulham anyway, so we might just as well get some continuity and confidence out of the excercise. We didn't win the game because we didn't rotate (it was the substitutes which won us the game anyway) but because we played well and got a break at the right time.

Are Masherano and Gerrard starting to play better together though now they have been forced into it by selection and injuries? Of course they are. Have Carragher and Hyppia sorted out the worst of their "getting to know you's" now they've played together lots of times again? Of course. Are we looking like a better team, because of many reasons but these being important ones amongst many? Obviously.


I suppose if I'm honest, I just look at the numbers and perhaps I convince myself because I want to be convinced that Rafa is about to see the light. Because I am so convinced myself, so 100% certain that constantly rotating the team is detrimental to it's wellbeing that I just can't see why he can't see it. My hope and belief is that he is finally coming round to the conclusion that it will never ever work in our league. I hope so because it won't.

Once we move onto phase D, will we see an attempt to find a settled team and a serious attempt to put ourselves back into the title race, or will we see an insistence that we must alter the team 3,4,5 times every match to keep players fresh. We really need to get something going, and keep it going if we're already up and running. A defeat against Manchester United and one against Marseilles and our season will be practically over. The painful truth is, even a draw in those games will render our season practically over in real terms if not in mathematical ones. I suppose then it would be "ah it was the injuries". We'll see.

[account deleted by request]

I don't think Rafa will ever "see the light", I think he will reduce rotation as the season goes on because thats part of his plan and strategie(every season), not because he stops believing. Form players will gradually get more and more games, and players that don't perform will get less playing time and less important matches. He believes in rotation and will continue to rotate.

[Sabre]

I quote just this bit Bigmick, because as always I don't disagree many things you say, and quoting all the post is sometimes too long for being read later, a bit redundant

Are Masherano and Gerrard starting to play better together though now they have been forced into it by selection and injuries? Of course they are. Have Carragher and Hyppia sorted out the worst of their "getting to know you's" now they've played together lots of times again? Of course. Are we looking like a better team, because of many reasons but these being important ones amongst many? Obviously.

But note that, both under rotation and no rotation, there are players that are played more and players that are benched more.

Alonso is more a regular than Leiva is. Under rotation aswell.

So to face an injury, in this case Agger's you need to replace him with a player that is not that regular, and thus he'll lack minutes and the "get to know you" thing.

Meaning. Even If we were under a "not rotating whatsoever" policy that "get to know process" would have happened aswell.

And that's another reason for I think rotation is better policy. When you have an injury like Agger's or Alonso's you enter in the team players that since they have been rotated, they have played, and thus the "get to know you" process is shorter.

In a nutshell, it's true that Hyypia is more confident now but it's not because he has not been rotated but because he's playing more regularly. And of course, it also has to do with confidence.

[66-1112520797]

So, those numbers to me offer pretty solid proof that Rafa has decidedly not cut back on his rotating in response to sub-par performances.  A fact that, as Sabre points out, is all the more remarkable given the injury issues we've faced for the past month.

Yes but doesnt that only tell us in a round about way that all this rotating isnt nessecerily helping us from one game to then next ?

Rotation in the eye of a manager can work in many ways, if you have a sub par performance from your side you may well be inclined to rotate more come the next game in hope your newboys perform better, and the sub performers have a kick up the jacksee if you like and are basically dropped.

As we well know even if a player has a blinder of a game (Crouch) perfect example can be sitting on the bench or even out shopping buying coke for his misses come the next game.

I agree with Saint Rafa will rotate whatever the matter, I dont see no particular pattern apart from the totals being similar or whatever. And whatever line of thought Rafa is on regarding rotation, I just dont agree in which the extent of it is done.

We beat Besikas 8-0 next game Rafa DIDNT rotate, does that mean the more goals we score the more likeely Rafa is to naming an unchanged team ? If so why play generally a brand of football that is negative. Also, we can win 2-1 the performance from the boys could be excellent even better than the performance against Besikas, yet as its only 2-1 Rafa will rotate ?
But surely as a manager you HAVE to be looking at the performances of your players aswell obviously as the result, why rest players when their IN form.

I dont really understand his methods TBH, and like Lawrie Sanchez said Liverpool are probably the hardest team to prepare for. So because Rafa can mind boggle many people outside of his square, I think that mind boggling selection policy will imapct to an extent on the players minds and perfomances.

But after ALL that rotation chaos I dont think we're any better off, the league table doesnt lie.

[Bad Bob]

I've only got time before my bus to respond to a couple of your points, Mick.

Disimilar they are though, in phase B there were 13 changes in the four games not including Carling Cup, and in phase C there were seven.

Now you could make the point (and no doubt somebody will before long) that it is only the fact that Rafa didn't rotate in the last game that has skewed the figures somewhat, and they may be right.

I would argue that and I would also argue that Rafa rotated more heavily than his norm from the Marseille game to the Tottenham one, on the back of really gutless performance from us--which is good management, for me.

I would also point out that the first game in period B saw a much more wayward selection away to Portsmouth than did the first game of C, Away to Everton. Although for the process of comparison we counted them as zero, there is no question the selection at Portsmouth was more "rotational" in its nature.

I really can't agree with that, mate.  They look like equally plausible line-ups to me given who was available:

Portsmouth                       Everton

Reina                               Reina
Finnan                             Finnan
Carragher                         Carragher
Agger                              Hyypia
Arbeloa                            Riise
Pennant                           Gerrard
Sissoko                            Sissoko
Alonso                             Mascherano
Benayoun                         Benayoun
Crouch                             Kuyt
Voronin                            Voronin

Once again I'll emphasize that Gerrard wasn't fit for the Portsmouth game, while Torres--in hindsight--probably could have played.  Mascherano had just flown back from Australia and Babel has yet to show that he justifies starts in tough away games like these.  So, I think that, even in hindsight and with the exception of the decision on Torres, the team picked against Portsmouth was still the strongest we could have fielded under the circumstances.  Looking at the Everton match, it was arguably more of a shake-up, as it was Gerrard's first appearance on the right this season.  All the other selections made sense, given who was available (i.e. Torres and Arbeloa injured, etc.)  So, no, I don't think the team selection against Everton was any more "rotational" than we saw against Portsmouth.

I suppose if I'm honest, I just look at the numbers and perhaps I convince myself because I want to be convinced that Rafa is about to see the light.

I think that's precisely it, mate.  You're seeing what you want to see a little bit here.  The rotation numbers haven't changed that much at all and, as Saint's correctly (IMO) said, they aren't likely to in any radical sense.  In fact, I would say that they may spike a bit more once key players return from injury and Rafa gets a few more of his coveted "options" back.  Sorry, mate, but a leopard does not change his spots.

[Judge]

On St Mike's interesting take on the subject. I actually think I fall into both of the last two categories.

you forgot the ''i know its early but....'' category

[dawson99]

can i ask a stupid question?

cheers...

why do we change our team all the time depending on who we play..eg: fulham we play differently than arsenal...

why dont they change to the way that we play? if we play our best way shouldnt the other teams be the ones that need to change, and not us?

[Sabre]

can i ask a stupid question?

cheers...

why do we change our team all the time depending on who we play..eg: fulham we play differently than arsenal...

why dont they change to the way that we play? if we play our best way shouldnt the other teams be the ones that need to change, and not us?

We change of way of playing because in football there are not magical formulas.

The zonal defense that works for us, can be disasterous for a team that hasn't the proper defences to play in zone.

You don't attack the same way an advanced line of defence or a deep defence.

It's a long and well known story told by all the big clubs: Big clubs have to have a way of playing and should not change it. Well it's not like that nowadays. Basically you change your approach to games not because you fear the opposition, but because you're seeking the way to make the most harm to the opposition, which is nice.

Not doing so can be a trap. Barcelona away game, they score. Then, we, planted well in the pitch, we draw. Barcelona, forgetting that there were plenty of minutes on front of them and a second leg, removed their holding midfielder. They were faithful to their philosophy, no english team had won in Barcelona NEVER, and they wanted to attack and win. As a result, Liverpool was the first english team to win in Barcelona. God knows what would happen if they hadn't been so anxious, but the truth is that their philosophy ended up with them eliminated. That's  IMHO anyway, you'll probably find lots of fans who're against changes and want to have a same style always. Lots of them.