Liverpool FC Forum

[PhiLFC]

Pasted this in the Rafa off thread but it needs to be here.. courtesy of "This is Anfield"... its interesting

Great Changes

When Ferguson sends a letter praising Benitez’s tactical-nous to switch to a 3-1-4-2 with Didi Hamann man-marking Kaka so as to allow Liverpool to attack with freedom, then surely the ‘new tinkerman’ should be given his just dues as one of the top managers currently around, and thus not one to be rashly dispatched due to a disappointing run of draws in the league, draws that still leave the Reds in a healthy position to continue their challenge for the league unlike the previous year.

But the draws still throw up the old cliché of rotation, rotation, rotation. However a solid, stonewall fact of Benitez’s regime is that, according to Opta stats which form the basis of any statistical evidence in the Premiership, Liverpool have rotated less than United and Chelsea in the last three years. Unbelievable but true! Here is a fact that I shamelessly borrow from Liverpool fan and renowned author Paul Tomkins:

Manchester United won last season's league title with Alex Ferguson having made a total of 118 changes to his Premiership line-ups throughout the campaign, at an average of 3.11 changes per game. The season before that, Chelsea won the league with Mourinho also having made 118 changes to his Premiership line-ups throughout the campaign, again (obviously) at an average of 3.11 changes per game.

So how many changes did Benitez make in 2006/07?

You guessed it, 118 changes to his Premiership line-ups throughout the campaign, at what the eagle-eyed among you will know recognise as an average of 3.11 changes per game.


Full article elsewhere

[LFC2007]

but, you do post against others rather than offering owt significant of your own thoughts first primarily. take your blinkers off fella

tell us who you used to be 

I've generally always posted my views first before questioning the views of others.

I used to be nobody but me.

[Judge]

but, you do post against others rather than offering owt significant of your own thoughts first primarily. take your blinkers off fella

tell us who you used to be 

I've generally always posted my views first before questioning the views of others.

I used to be nobody but me.

well thats ok then

[Leonmc0708]

The Liverpool Rotation is a "fabrication of the media."

EVERY TEAM does it.

Here's a few facts.

Only two teams in the Premiership have used the same team twice. Arsenal and Liverpool.

Only one team has used less players than Liverpool this season - Bolton. We've used 21 (as have a few teams), they've used 17.

Want to know who's played more games than any other Premiership play? Pepe Raina with 18.

Which team has used the most players this season? Man Utd.

Want to know the last time Man U and Chelsea used the same team twice? I don't know I gave up 30 matches ago last season. Anybody want to enlighten us?

So using Liverpool as the benchmark of Rotating the team is just laughable. Like I said, EVERY TEAM does it.

[bigmick]

Every team does do it of course, but not as much and not as often as Liverpool under Rafa. This has been done to death in amongst these pages so there's no point in going over the stats all over again.

As I understand it, we haven't rotated that much in the league (although still way too much), and we would compare reasonably well to Chelsea and Man Utd although we'd probably be a tad higher, and much higher than Arsenal. In the Champions League however we've rotated much more heavily, in the Carling Cup it doesn't really count.

The argument is really in two parts. Part one is, do we rotate more than Arsenal, Manchester United and Chelsea? I think the likes of Bad Bob have shown in their excellent analysis that we do, particularly at the start of the season.

The second part of the argument iss whether that extra rotation is a good idea. That's been done to death so I won't go over it again here.

What I would say though that any figures get distorted a little because we generally rotate heavily at the start of the season and then fall behind the leaders (whether it's coincidence or whatever, that's what has happened each year under Rafa), before fielding more settled line-ups as we gather more points and climb back up the table into a Champions League slot. The other clubs do it the other way around. They rotate it seems to me less at the start of the season as they gather momentum, and then more as they get the wheels in motion and can afford to rest players.

Whichever way you look at it and we could argue about it all night, but IMHO none of the other three big four teams would have gone to Pompey and left both Gerrard and Torres on the bench if they had our squad of players. None of them.

[Perry Digweed]

The Liverpool Rotation is a "fabrication of the media."

EVERY TEAM does it.

Here's a few facts.

Only two teams in the Premiership have used the same team twice. Arsenal and Liverpool.

Only one team has used less players than Liverpool this season - Bolton. We've used 21 (as have a few teams), they've used 17.

Want to know who's played more games than any other Premiership play? Pepe Raina with 18.

Which team has used the most players this season? Man Utd.

Want to know the last time Man U and Chelsea used the same team twice? I don't know I gave up 30 matches ago last season. Anybody want to enlighten us?

So using Liverpool as the benchmark of Rotating the team is just laughable. Like I said, EVERY TEAM does it.

Yes, good post. Good stats.

For me this raises another question:

Why is it usually Liverpool who get mentioned in relation to rotation?

[Leonmc0708]

This has been done to death in amongst these pages so there's no point in going over the stats all over again.

Is that because the stats prove that we have not rotated as much as people make out ?

[bigmick]

This has been done to death in amongst these pages so there's no point in going over the stats all over again.

Is that because the stats prove that we have not rotated as much as people make out ?

Well that's not the reason that I'm not going to go over them Leon, no (although it's a fair enough retort). I would suspect though that if you added up the number of rotations from each team and divided it by the number of matches, we would absolutely certainly have the highest per game. That doesn't of course tell the whole story, because it doesn't take into account injuries or "forced rotations" as they've become known within these twenty seven or so pages. It also doesn't take into accouint the fact that most everyone would support the manager if in the early rounds of the Carling Cup he changed practically the whole team before changing it back for the next game. It also of course doesn't take into account who you rotate, where, when, why and who you replace them with. Leaving out Torres and Gerrard at Pompey is obviously not the same as leaving out Finnan and Riise at Home to Derby.

But whatever abny stats tell us, it doesn't get away from the simple fact that rotation "rafa-style" means an acceptance of the theory that the team is made up of eleven players, within which there is a central core who play almost every game but who are joined by a group of five or six players which could possibly change from game to game. Being "fresh" is of paramount importance, and overides concerns (if indeed there are any) about the team finding fluency and rhythm. The squad is picked with confidence, and the eleven which take the field should be strong enough to handle pretty much most circumstances, almost regardless of which group or sub group (whatever the feck a sub group is) you put out.

I stand by my earlier statement that regardless of stats (which do bear the point out anyway), none of the other managers in the big four would have left both Torres and Gerrard on the bench at Pompey. It seems only fair to point out that I'm not sure any of them would necessarily have picked the same team Rafa did at Newcastle either, so as in life there is always a flipside.

Should somebody else want to drag the stats up though, needless to say I'm quite happy to spend the next three weeks boring everybody into submission discussig them 

[Perry Digweed]

I stand by my earlier statement that regardless of stats (which do bear the point out anyway), none of the other managers in the big four would have left both Torres and Gerrard on the bench at Pompey. It seems only fair to point out that I'm not sure any of them would necessarily have picked the same team Rafa did at Newcastle either, so as in life there is always a flipside.

A fair comment. The truth may be that Rafa felt that it would be much easier to beat Portsmouth than Newcastle. Had that been achieved without Gerrard and Torres he would argue he had used rotation well.

[stmichael]

funny how rotation hasn't even been mentioned after the game on saturday as we won isn't it?

rotation was more in evidence in that game than most of the recent games.

[lakes10]

we will see a bit less of the rotation from now i feel, (well i hope so).
we have a grat team as long as they get the time to play together.

[Bad Bob]

funny how rotation hasn't even been mentioned after the game on saturday as we won isn't it?

rotation was more in evidence in that game than most of the recent games.

Very true.  A central midfield of Sissoko and (first-time starter) Lucas?  In an away match?  At a ground where we've had problems in the past? With Kewell starting his first club match in 18 months?  And Gerrard in a free role?  That's about as radical a rotation as we've seen from Rafa all year (but, of course, we did have the dynamic duo of Gerrard and Torres on the pitch, which, in some circles, seems to be considered the antidote to rotation's fluency-sapping properties). 

That team selection, IMHO, completely belies the suggestion that Rafa is now rotating less because he's come to the conclusion that he can't afford to.  If this week's taught us nothing else, it's that Rafa is one stubborn sod, whether it be with a microphone in his face or a teamsheet in his hand.

[Sabre]

I guess Newcastle rotated a lot, because they were poor. And it's obviously rotation the source of all troubles, as there are worse squads than Newcastles'. :P

We didn't win the game comfortably thanks to rotation neither. Rotation is just a secondary factor when it comes to how a team plays one game. Of course team selection is much more important. But rotation per se? no.

[metalhead]

funny how rotation hasn't even been mentioned after the game on saturday as we won isn't it?

rotation was more in evidence in that game than most of the recent games.

Very true.  A central midfield of Sissoko and (first-time starter) Lucas?  In an away match?  At a ground where we've had problems in the past? With Kewell starting his first club match in 18 months?  And Gerrard in a free role?  That's about as radical a rotation as we've seen from Rafa all year (but, of course, we did have the dynamic duo of Gerrard and Torres on the pitch, which, in some circles, seems to be considered the antidote to rotation's fluency-sapping properties). 

That team selection, IMHO, completely belies the suggestion that Rafa is now rotating less because he's come to the conclusion that he can't afford to.  If this week's taught us nothing else, it's that Rafa is one stubborn sod, whether it be with a microphone in his face or a teamsheet in his hand.

Well I thought he rotated very sensibly against Newcastle. Lets take a look, Mascherano came back from South America, so he felt jet-lagged and needed a rest. Plus, Lucas, Sissoko, Torres, Carragher, Arbeloa were all fresh to start because they didn't have any international matches.

I thought Benitez was spot on against Newcastle, not only he rotated sensibly, he also did not bench Gerrard and Torres, who are world class players that need to start every premiership game.

IMO, Benitez will stick with playing Torres, Gerrard, Carragher and Reina every game, but may rotate our squad players.

[JoeTerp]

funny how rotation hasn't even been mentioned after the game on saturday as we won isn't it?

rotation was more in evidence in that game than most of the recent games.

Very true.  A central midfield of Sissoko and (first-time starter) Lucas?  In an away match?  At a ground where we've had problems in the past? With Kewell starting his first club match in 18 months?  And Gerrard in a free role?  That's about as radical a rotation as we've seen from Rafa all year (but, of course, we did have the dynamic duo of Gerrard and Torres on the pitch, which, in some circles, seems to be considered the antidote to rotation's fluency-sapping properties). 

That team selection, IMHO, completely belies the suggestion that Rafa is now rotating less because he's come to the conclusion that he can't afford to.  If this week's taught us nothing else, it's that Rafa is one stubborn sod, whether it be with a microphone in his face or a teamsheet in his hand.

although it is true that it was a pretty radical line-up against Newcastle, you have said earlier that you can't really count post international break changes as rotation.  I am guessing that Momo and Lucas were the only CMs to stay at Melwood, and maybe Rafa really liked what he saw.  And it wasn't like Kewell was declared fit on Friday and played Saturday.  His comeback in the reserves match was a month ago and he played 90 minutes for his country the week before.  And where his put Gerrard can be seen as a "Forced" rotation with Yossi and Pennant out injured