Liverpool FC Forum

[bigmick]

It's an interesting question Sabes and before even attempting an answer I ought to confess that I know very little about the Spanish players. Louis Garcia crossed the ball for the winner the other day, and although it was typical of his contributions for us it appears to me that our Prince-like little trickster has undergone not only a face lift, but a full blown body lift as wel as growing his hair into a Voronin like pikey tail which was most disconcerting. I can only conclude that Louis Garcia is infact not the same player we've come to know and love, and that Garcia is akin to Cole over here in that lots of footballers are called by that name.


That aside and on the question of rotation and Alonso. Well I would in all probability have doen the same thing as the Spanish coach and rested two thirds of the team against Greece. To me the move made the utmost sense. Firstly the first choice team gets a chance to have a bit of a rest, which after a long season can't be a bad idea (as opposed to after four games of the new season of course which is an entirely different calculation). Secondly, it's a fair bet that barring a Switzerland/Turkey after match brawl, it's unlikely that any of the blokes sitting on the bench are going to get either carded or injured. Thirdly of course, you give the chance to the second string not only to remain fit and ready to step in in the latter stages of the tournament, but in extreme cases to push for a starting slot.

Now whether or not Alonso did enough with his appearance against Greece to force his way in I wouldn't know as I don't know well enough the ability of his rivals, or well enough how Spain are looking to play. It does seem to me though that if you are going to change the team, be it as manager of Liverpoool after four games or of Spain in a dead rubber of a major championship, it is reasonable to consider the option of maintaining in your first choice eleven a player or two of the ones you brought in if they pull up trees. The idea which Rafa seems to have had at times that it is largely irrelevent how you performed in the last game when we are picking the following matches names, has always been something of an anthama to me. This applies to both extremes of course. If Crouch is in the scoring form of his life and has just scored two more goals in a league game foillowed by midweek goals at International level, I wouldn't be resting/rotating him myself like we did. Similarly, if Dirk Kuyt is looking about as likely to score as Johnny Mac did from row L in the "what you look like thread", I probably would be resting/rotating him.

Two other small (I promise) points. Firstly, this "how he's going in training thing". I'll keep it short, it's utter b0ll0cks. What a bloke is doing at Melwood or indeed El Melwoodo in a practice match while everyone is having a laugh bares no relation IMHO to proper football. I say this within reason of course. It would for instance be reasonable to conclude that after watching me play left midfield for half an hour on the training pitch as a result of a "Jim'll Fix It" style dream come true, that I aren't actually the answer. What I mean is if Hyppia scores a thirty yarder from a free-kick in training and pulls his shirt over his head in celebration, you don't let him take all the dead-balls on the weekend.

Lastly, the does it confuse the other team bit. Yes possibly it does, but it confuses yourself as well. I've no doubt Reading were pretty confused when Peter Crouch lined up down the left wing against them for instance. As I remember though they managed to overcome their confusion fairly quickly before resoundly beating us 3-1. Confusion is unfortunately a two way street.

[Kharhaz]

The second answer, I don't like it so much. It's used by fans

Then dont pose such questions on a "fans" forum !

[Sabre]

The second answer, I don't like it so much. It's used by fans

Then dont pose such questions on a "fans" forum !

I should have used agreed, because once again I used an Spanish expression. For the record Karhaz, I like other posters thinking differently, because if everyone thought as I do, I'd hardly learn anything!! 

As for Bigmick's post, it's a good one, as usual. For the sake of denying that we rotationist do not accept decent points of the antirotationists, I'll once again admit that

The idea which Rafa seems to have had at times that it is largely irrelevent how you performed in the last game when we are picking the following matches names, has always been something of an anthama to me. This applies to both extremes of course. If Crouch is in the scoring form of his life and has just scored two more goals in a league game foillowed by midweek goals at International level, I wouldn't be resting/rotating him myself like we did.

Rafa does seem to overlook sometimes the form of previous matches and that's a mistake.

To be honest, I expected your answer as a whole, and I think it's respectable (I also respect Luis) and I'm familiar with it (it's classic football!), I just think that rotation have good sides, and wanted to tell you where I come from sometimes with two specific examples.

Another interesting thing, is that I've found a new point in which our football views differ dramatically. The one about Mellwoodo! , I'm of the school of thought that "you play in Sunday as you train during the week", and by train I don't mean only the mini matches but everyone of the exercises. If you don't do a good job over the week, you won't see the results on Sunday . That said I do agree

What I mean is if Hyppia scores a thirty yarder from a free-kick in training and pulls his shirt over his head in celebration, you don't let him take all the dead-balls on the weekend.

that if you see this once you don't have to take an inmediate decission for sundays, but if you see it often, you should.

[bigmick]

What I mean is if Hyppia scores a thirty yarder from a free-kick in training and pulls his shirt over his head in celebration, you don't let him take all the dead-balls on the weekend.

that if you see this once you don't have to take an inmediate decission for sundays, but if you see it often, you should.

Obiously Sabes you have to take into account repeated prowess in training. Even then though, sometimes you have to accept that in horse racing parlance you get the occasional "morning glory's" (that is to say a horse which can catch pigeons at home on the gallops, but couldn't catch me on the racetrack).

A classic and recent example of this phenomenon would be a player I like very much, Fabio Aurellio. We can only assume that at home behind closed doors he is more than a little bit tasty with the free-kicks, as everyone defers to him whenever we get one and he's on the pitch. We also know though from the monotonous regularity and the unnerring accuracy he displays in hitting a bloke who's eating a hot-dog four or five rows back from the goal that it's probably time to let someone else have a go. Not Hyppia though, if you know what I mean.


There have been many pro's over the years who by all accounts wouldn't have got a game with a sunday league team based on sundays prowess, but could do the business on a Saturday every week. Goodness knows how many games a Paul McGrath would have squeezed into his career if his managers had based selection always on midweek keepy uppies, head tennis and the like.

[66-1112520797]

After reading Big Micks posts and Sabres posts ' pro's and con's' but also having my own belief to. The con side of rotation seems much more logical and better balanced, in its debate and wins hands down. There are more opinionated answers coming from Mick which are nailed on IMO, than Sabres theories.

Yes every team needs to rotate every now and again, that I can live with. Resting key players for the Carling cup is the most obvious. Even changing a couple of players around in the CL games (group stages). Keeping the core though of your best eleven for Premiership games is a MUST though IMO. I'm not saying you cant change a player here and there every now and again, but the extent Rafa has done in the past is an over complication in football, and the team have mostly come off worse for it after 'rotating for the sake of it'.

I'll never forget the managers comments after the home game against Birmingham, when asked why Rafa didnt pick Torres for the match. His answer was because he thought that Birmingham would sit deep and not give Torres the space to work in behind their defence. That was a terrible statement from Benitez and equally as bad a decision in resting him for that game. Knowing full well most teams that come to Anfield will sit deep and defend. So for Rafa to come up with that cracker of an answer more or less tells me that Torres was rotated for the sake of it. Otherwise he could or would of said Torres had a knock in training and we decided to rest him for the Birmingham game.

Rotation teams may work and keep players fitter, but not to the extent Rafa rotates, he has to cut down on his numbers and how often he rotates. I dont think the arguement anymore should be on the ideas of rotation itself, but more to do with the way Benitez and the extent in which he rotates his sides for me is the asking point. And unlike BM I think Rafa will go back to 'styling' because it seems to be his way, he has done it in seasons gone by where he stuck with more or less the same team in the latter half of the season.  To which we'd all thought "hes seen the light" and revert straight back to his natural ways at the begiing of the following season, I'm not holding m,y breath on this one thats for sure.

Rafa also said the Premiership wil be his best achievement in football if he can win it, as its tough, why not make it easier on t\yourself Rafa and give yourself a fighting chance and stop fecking about with the team so much.

[account deleted by request]

Spot on Bamaga.

And unlike BM I think Rafa will go back to 'styling' because it seems to be his way, he has done it in seasons gone by where he stuck with more or less the same team in the latter half of the season.  To which we'd all thought "hes seen the light" and revert straight back to his natural ways at the begiing of the following season, I'm not holding m,y breath on this one thats for sure.

I agree completely mate, I don't think Rafa has seen any light, he believes in rotation and like a few on here probably believes its more down to a lack of squad strength rather than rotation that we have struggled to challenge.

[bigmick]

Spot on Bamaga.

And unlike BM I think Rafa will go back to 'styling' because it seems to be his way, he has done it in seasons gone by where he stuck with more or less the same team in the latter half of the season.  To which we'd all thought "hes seen the light" and revert straight back to his natural ways at the begiing of the following season, I'm not holding m,y breath on this one thats for sure.

I agree completely mate, I don't think Rafa has seen any light, he believes in rotation and like a few on here probably believes its more down to a lack of squad strength rather than rotation that we have struggled to challenge.

Well if he hasn't seen the light after the final third of last season then there really is no hope for him. If he wasn't convinced by our consistency under more settled selection policies even while playing fairly moderately, he could look at Manchester United.

They tried some "styling' of their own and came perilously close to losing the title because of it. Only some predictably bizarre refereeing from Steve Bennet and a penalty shootout slip from John Terry prevented them from being pipped to the post by Chelsea in both major competitions. They could have quite easily ended up winning feck all despite having a bloke scoring 40 goals or whatever the feck it was from right wing, despite having the best defence in the league and unquestionably the all-round best team. Chelsea came so very close to denying them, despite sacking their manager and having the threat of player strikes earlier in the season, and despite appointing a relative novice as manager.

That same Chelsea which ran past us in the League despite us being more than their equal each time we played them. The same Chelsea who put us out of the Champions League (over-running us in extra time) three days after they beat Man Utd in the league with the same team. The same Chelsea who didn't adopt the rotational mantra (not by choice anyway, they had to of course rotate throughout the season as their team was ravaged by African Nations commitments and injuries).

Despite being a fairly average team, Chelsea almost won the League and Champions League double while not rotating their team unnecessarily. Like I say, if he hasn't seen the light by now then really is no hope for him.



As for the "squad strength" thing Saint, its the biggest non argument load of b0ll0cks I've heard from some of the believers. Saying how well we would do under "Rafa style" if we swapped Ronaldo for Benayoun, Ferdinand for Hyppia, Rooney for Kuyt, Fabregas for Lucas etc etc is utterly pointless. Syurely the debate visa-vis rotation must centre on whether or not it allows the players which actually are at our disposal to play to the best of their ability. It really is that simple as far as I'm concerned. Does the methodology help or hinder us over the course of a season? The answer for me is an emphatic no.

FWIW I happen to believe that "Rafa style" wouldn't work in the English Premiership regardless of who you brought in, but that is another question. If the trusters are serious that "it's not anything to do with rotation, it's just the players which aren't good enough" then what do they suggest. Since there seems little chance we are going to outbid the big spenders anytime soon, what do we do just keep on rotating and coming fourth and just give it ten years and hope they go skint?

No, we've tried it. God knows we've tried it and it hasn't worked. It;s not even not worked, it's not even nearly worked. The biggest travesty of all, and I've said this many times, is that Rafa has done such a good job of assembling the group of players that were he to leave, some Tom Dick or Harry would come in, pick a settled team and do exceedingly well.

All he has to do is give the team a chance. If he does that, we'll challenge in no uncertain terms (neck well and truly on the block from me there). If he doesn't, it'll all be over for us by Christmas again and he deserves to be gone.

He will though, he has seen the light, and we'll challenge   

[account deleted by request]

I thought that way after the good run in to the end of the season back in 2005/6 Mick. At the start of 2006/2007 he rotated more than ever (until the beginning of 2007/8 that is ,when he rotated even more )

It seems to me the more good players he has, the more he rotates, and with quite a few of our players coming back after a busy summer, he is going to rotate them even more.

I hope you are right Mick, but I don't honestly believe you will be.

[66-1112520797]

I thought that way after the good run in to the end of the season back in 2005/6 Mick. At the start of 2006/2007 he rotated more than ever (until the beginning of 2007/8 that is ,when he rotated even more )

It seems to me the more good players he has, the more he rotates, and with quite a few of our players coming back after a busy summer, he is going to rotate them even more.

I hope you are right Mick, but I don't honestly believe you will be.

And thats another thing S@int, he has bought in soooo  many 'options' and possibilities'. That hes sticking them in and out of the team like nobodies business. And I'm sat here wondering whether he actually knows his best eleven. 

[Sabre]

Obiously Sabes you have to take into account repeated prowess in training. Even then though, sometimes you have to accept that in horse racing parlance you get the occasional "morning glory's" (that is to say a horse which can catch pigeons at home on the gallops, but couldn't catch me on the racetrack).

Ah, yes, I wouldn't oppose any of this. While I give a lot of importance to training, we all know that a striker that's been 8 weeks without scoring will be anxious, even if in the training session we see him scoring a lot. However, I do think that the best way he has from getting away from that drought is a combination of training hard and not to be too obsessed with the drought.

I see you insist a bit though in lightening up the training sessions with head tennis, laughs and the stuff, but I give a lot of importance to training, and it's much more on it that a recover session or exercises to lighten up the mood. In fact, I love the seriousness that's given to training in England with no cameras allowed regularly to the training sessions, that means it's taken seriously -- despite it prevents us fans from having a good info of what's going on in the team.

Thank you for your views, I'll leave the internet victories for those who need it, I wanted your contribution.

A classic and recent example of this phenomenon would be a player I like very much, Fabio Aurellio. We can only assume that at home behind closed doors he is more than a little bit tasty with the free-kicks, as everyone defers to him whenever we get one and he's on the pitch. We also know though from the monotonous regularity and the unnerring accuracy he displays in hitting a bloke who's eating a hot-dog four or five rows back from the goal that it's probably time to let someone else have a go. Not Hyppia though, if you know what I mean.

This is not already a rotation debate, but a bit of topic drifting, but certainly you touch an interesting point and I agree with it -- partly.

I agree that Fabio Aurelio is a player I like (a lot in my case), and I agree his free kicks have not been accurate enough, and I also agree someone else should be given that responsability.

But I'm not sure it is a case of what you describe in your first paragraph. He used to be a very good free kick taker in Spain, so he does know to perform well under the pressure of competition besides doing it at the training session.

If he's been given that job and Gonzalez wasn't (in a smaller club he is allowed to do so), it must be because he is able to do it. A good free kick taker should be equally good in Spain than in England, no matter the pace and the tempo and all that stereotypes!

So I'm not sure what's been wrong with him, despite I agree he's not been productive enough. Maybe it's like when a striker is under a drought and he has not confidence. Anyhow, I agree we should find another player for the hierarchy of free kick takers as we've been too dull in that.

I also wonder what's the future of Fabio Aurelio at the club. Curiously enough it's as if we've forgotten about him, I haven't seen him mentioned in the "ongoing rumours". Any news?

[bigmick]

On the question of Aurelio's free-kicks, it's probably the case that as he's not scored with any he's got a wee bit anxious in the taking of them. I think that when a player has not scored for a while (usually a striker) they kind of try and make double sure, be almost too careful when the opportunity arrives. This is what I think has been Aurelio's problem in that it seems to me he's kind of trying to place it into the goal, instead of remembering that he has to actually shoot and not pass it goalwards. It's no surprise to me sabes that he was a good free kick specialist in Spain as he does strike the ball beautifully both in his long passes and on the occasions he's scored from open play. Equally of course you're right in that free-kicks have nothing to do with the country the football is being played in.

I think as far as his long-term prospects for Liverpool are concerned, that if he could stay fit we probably wouldn't have signed Dossena. Each time Aurelio has strung together four or five performances without getting either injured or rotated he has looked very good. Seemingly though each time he has been coming into form there has been one reason or another why he couldn't play. If Dossena turns out to be better than Aurelio then fair enough I say, but if the little Brazillian can get his fitness right then the new fella will have to be a good player IMHo to keep him out on a permanent basis.

Back onto the training thing, I would be very surprised if in mid season when the games are coming three in a week there is much exacting work being done in between matches. There'll be some set-piece stuff, some analysis, some pattern of play things, a few drills, some video and a bit of fairly light five a sides I should think. If there's much more than that I actually think it'd be a mistake FWIW. Perhaps there'' be bits and pieces of fitness stuff going on as well, but surely more of the stretching variety than cross country meltdowns round and round the training pitch. I've often thought when you get the "he looks sharp in training" thing thrown around that if it was me I'd be asking them to look sharp on a Saturday afternoon, not waste it on a Tuesday morning.

[Judge]

you can guarantee that this thread is alive as long as big mick is around

[andy_g]

and that every single other thread on the board will be alive as long as judge is around

[Judge]

and that every single other thread on the board will be alive as long as judge is around

only the old bumped threads andy

[Sabre]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but while browsing nervously in the match your opinions, I think I saw a post of bigmick asking defiantly things like "has rafa seen the light or not?". It seemed to me that he implied Rafa is rotating less. And perhaps that was what he made him to predict a convincing 1-3 for us.

I think he also mentioned the posters who vehemently defended rotation.

Well, since I defended and defend rotation, I think it was the time to recover one of our most popular threads, as I like a good debate under any circunstance (after a win is better, there's better atmosphere).

Back then, when I defended rotation, I wasn't that vehement I think, I just was stating that it's a tool to manage the squad, and that IMHO, it wasn't the main factor to explain why we weren't challenging. In fact for me it wasn't even an important factor.

Now, the posters that like stats will able to say if we're rotating much less or a bit less, but I still think rotation or the lack of it, isn't the main factor to explain our good start.

The reasons to explain our good start, are as numerous as the reasons to explain our failure last season: good team selections, promising what Riera has provided as of late, being solid in defence conceding only 2 goals... Similarly, the reason we haven't scored fluently is not related to rotation, it has more to do with streaks of our strikers, who they had a bad one before today even if they were played together some games in a row.

That's my opinion, sorry to be stubborn about not considering rotation a key factor. Note that I'm not considering rotation as the greatest discovery of the decade in football neither, just saying I think it's not that important. But, whoever has reasons to consider it a key factor, I'm all for reading their opinions with attention.