Liverpool FC Forum

they can coexist imo.
the problem is having someone intelligent behind them to link up and provide the final ball as well as support.gerrard did that fantastic the other night and all 3 were good value.
they have to get a run now of games together to see what they can produce and with the quality of gerrard sitting behind them we will see more goals from all involved.

stmichael wrote:

It's also about using Gerrard effectively as well. I'd say for the threee to thrive we need Spearing to sit in front of the defence just to add that bit of protection

Spearing is now one of the most important players we have for the rest of the season. Tuesday night proves that he's a vital cog in the wheel that does the dirty work which allows our other more creative player to play. There's not a chance Gerrard would have been bombing forward into those positions if he was playing alongside Adam.

Spearing's presence and abililty to cover ground also lets our fullbacks get forward more. I don't think it's any coincidence that Kelly had his best game in ages in an attacking sense with Spearing being willing to cover his position when he did go forward.

He's a little workhorse no doubt about that ,but against the Bitterz he thrived in the middle basically because their chief ball winner Fellaini was paired
with the much vaunted ,but on this occasion woeful and highly ineffective Rodwell .

I think when teams play a far more pressing game Spearing is found out ,way too many stray balls and under hit passes for my liking ,and some of the lads bombing around the pitch and then frantically attempting to get back into a central position sometimes  borders on the erratic .

I do like the lads spirit though ,and I think he should be in our midfield when we play at home ,but not when we play away and are being forced back
for long periods into our own half .

RED BEERGOGGLES wrote:

stmichael wrote:

It's also about using Gerrard effectively as well. I'd say for the threee to thrive we need Spearing to sit in front of the defence just to add that bit of protection

Spearing is now one of the most important players we have for the rest of the season. Tuesday night proves that he's a vital cog in the wheel that does the dirty work which allows our other more creative player to play. There's not a chance Gerrard would have been bombing forward into those positions if he was playing alongside Adam.

Spearing's presence and abililty to cover ground also lets our fullbacks get forward more. I don't think it's any coincidence that Kelly had his best game in ages in an attacking sense with Spearing being willing to cover his position when he did go forward.

He's a little workhorse no doubt about that ,but against the Bitterz he thrived in the middle basically because their chief ball winner Fellaini was paired
with the much vaunted ,but on this occasion woeful and highly ineffective Rodwell .

I think when teams play a far more pressing game Spearing is found out ,way too many stray balls and under hit passes for my liking ,and some of the lads bombing around the pitch and then frantically attempting to get back into a central position sometimes  borders on the erratic .

I do like the lads spirit though ,and I think he should be in our midfield when we play at home ,but not when we play away and are being forced back
for long periods into our own half .

i agree to an extent about everton's midfield. i couldn't believe their team selection to be honest (not that i'm complaining). it played right into our hands.

on spearing though, yes i've been a critic in the past and he's by no means without his flaws but he's still easily the closest player we have to lucas in terms of doing something resembling the job lucas would be doing if he was fit. he has to be in the team now because none of adam, gerrard, henderson or shelvey are even remotely defensive minded or going to be willing to put a foot in.

stmichael wrote:

i agree to an extent about everton's midfield. i couldn't believe their team selection to be honest (not that i'm complaining). it played right into our hands.

on spearing though, yes i've been a critic in the past and he's by no means without his flaws but he's still easily the closest player we have to lucas in terms of doing something resembling the job lucas would be doing if he was fit. he has to be in the team now because none of adam, gerrard, henderson or shelvey are even remotely defensive minded or going to be willing to put a foot in.

Yeah ,it was a decidedly strange line up Moyes went with ,most bluenoses I know are fuming with their manager for his lack of respect
for the fans and what a Derby means to people . I mean don't get me wrong, I was buzzing when I seen the hod carrier and Anichebe
up front ,but I doubt the Bitterz were that impressed having forked out a fair few quid for a ticket .   gotta laugh though .

I've been thinking about this particular question a lot throughout the season and it's all finally starting to come together now. Who should spearhead our attacking force; the little tricky Suarez or the big target man Carroll.  For a simple answer to the question, its neither.

The way we've set up for most of the season has been 4-3-3 or a permutation of 4-5-1. We've also seen the side play 4-4-1-1 in some occasions (particularly when Kuyt is preferred in a deeper central role) and 4-4-2 when both Carroll and Suarez are paired upfront.

My favorite of the bunch and the way forward for us imo is the 4-4-1-1. Most of our players fit that system, and with a couple of good buys in the summer I think we could potentially have a very strong starting 11 playing that setup. The signings however, arent the only thing we'd have to do to make it work; which brings me back to the question of Carroll or Suarez.

If there's anything that we will remember about our league campaign this season when it eventually comes to an end, its going to be all the chances we've missed in front of goal. Our forwards have abysmal goal-scoring stats in the league and it says something that none of our players will probably end the season with double digit goals in the league.

Suarez (our leading scorer with a shockingly poor 7 league goals) does his best work around the box rather than inside it. There's a case to be made that if he passed a little more than he does, he would be a huge creative force high up the pitch and one of the best second strikers or #10s in the league. His passing range isnt excellent, but the way he creates the space for himself and the players around him is simply phenomenal. For me, his style of play (which depends primarily on getting the ball to his feet in deeper areas and taking it upon himself to carve out the opportunity) makes him a poor choice for leading the line on a consistent basis. More often than not -when played alone upfront this season- we've seen a  blatant lack of presence from our players in the box. With the lone striker operating outside the box, Gerrard playing the new deeper role in the middle, Kuyt being on the bench more often than not, and Downing preferring to operate in wider positions, its not surprising that this is the case. As such, I'll pass on the idea of him leading the line.

Which brings me to the 35million signing who was supposed to come in and offer us that presence in the box that we are missing, Andy Carroll. Where do you begin with big Andy. Without a doubt, whomever suggested, sanctioned, or signed the deal are all disappointed they didn't act differently. My criticism of Carroll has been the same since day1, he doesn't seem to know how to move inside the box. At his best, he's a devastating forward who can easily score 15+ goals a season from headers. However, he seems too static in most occasions and that tips the advantage to the defenders who no doubt wouldnt get anywhere near the ball if he was attacking it rather than waiting for it to bounce of his head. For all his progress in the past couple of months, he's still nowhere near the standard you would expect of a forward leading the line for a top4 side. If we're honest, his improvement has mainly come in the form of him missing less passes, bringing the ball down better, and winning more flick ons; All good attributes for a target man, but if he's on the pitch as a forward, you want to see more. Atm, it's difficult to see where this extra bit will come from. He's far from a clinical finisher, is a poor passer of the ball by any standard, and has very limited pace and dribbling skills. Outside the box, he's pretty much useless unless the ball is contested in the air. To his credit though, Carroll has actually helped us become a better side from set-pieces when he's on the pitch than we were prior to his arrival. The reason why he hasnt gotten as much playing time as he would have liked imo is that Kenny just doesnt think he fits our style of play. The kind of service he requires isnt exactly the kind of service we seem to want to offer. In playing Downing down the right, Kuyt down the left, no attacking midfielder behind the forward...etc etc Kenny is making it clear that he prefers the ball on the ground with forwards having the freedom to contribute to the buildup rather than simply waiting for the delivery. With all things considered, Carroll seems like an excellent backup ; a perfect plan B if you will. As for him leading the line week in week out, not a chance. Not in the next 3 years imo.

Going back to the 4-4-1-1, I'd like to see us attempt to move Suarez back to a second striker role next season. If we can get him to press the ball a bit better and perhaps pass it a bit faster then we could be on to something. In front of him, we'll obviously need to bring someone new to lead the line and provide the goals. Someone like Falcao, Soldado, Llorente, Cavani, Pazzini, Remy..etc

For this season, I think if we had tried this lineup with Suarez playing behind...wait for it.... Dirk Kuyt, then we could have done much much better. If nothing else, Kuyt upfront provides us with good movement inside the box while also offering decent linkup play outside it. I think he would have scored more than both Carroll and Suarez if he had been given as many opportunities upfront simply because of his off the ball movement.

In terms of being a "complimentary good"... if Ian Rush was the ice cream, Kenny Dalglish was the wafer.

Today Luis Suarez is the ice cream.... unfortunately Andy Carroll is the pudding

Liverpool results in last 7 games Andy Carroll's started: WWDWWWW – Last 9 without him: DDDLLLLLL

Carroll came on the field at QPR when we were winning 2-1... he is clearly the reason we lost 3-2 then. We were drawing 1-1 with Wigan when he slid on his backside in not blocking their winning goal... he is clearly the reason we lost 2-1 then.

Yes its a flawed logic, doesnt stop others though.

Oddly enough, Andy Carrolls "best" game for us was at Bolton when we lost 3-1, rare moment of quality with a quality assist for Bellamy goal.

D___C » Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:02 am wrote:Carroll came on the field at QPR when we were winning 2-1... he is clearly the reason we lost 3-2 then. We were drawing 1-1 with Wigan when he slid on his backside in not blocking their winning goal... he is clearly the reason we lost 2-1 then.

Yes its a flawed logic, doesnt stop others though.

Oddly enough, Andy Carrolls "best" game for us was at Bolton when we lost 3-1, rare moment of quality with a quality assist for Bellamy goal.

That is a shockingly s.hit post.

Carroll is the reason we lost to Wigan? I understand your contempt for Carroll's failings but blaming him because we lost two games is simply a bias agenda, and there is NO logic whatsoever to your ridiculous reasoning.

Firstly, the reason we lost to QPR was because of a 13min lapse in our defence as they decided to switch off. Henderson, Carragher and Skertel and even Reina were culpable for their goals, not Andy Carroll.

Against Wigan, the WHOLE side struggled for a performance from the first whistle and Carroll wasn't included initially. So we were already playing dire stuff without Carroll on the field. Wigan's second goal was another defensive issue where we failed to clear our lines, Carroll being the TEAM player he is was back their helping out his defense - but should he be the last line of defense trying to make a last ditch tackle to block a shot that went in for a goal? Of course not, and by laying the loss of these games at Carroll's feet gives you absolutely no creedance in your posts whatsoever.

i dont think u understand.. "Yes its a flawed logic, doesnt stop others though"

D___C » Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:02 am wrote:Carroll came on the field at QPR when we were winning 2-1... he is clearly the reason we lost 3-2 then. We were drawing 1-1 with Wigan when he slid on his backside in not blocking their winning goal... he is clearly the reason we lost 2-1 then.

Yes its a flawed logic, doesnt stop others though.

Oddly enough, Andy Carrolls "best" game for us was at Bolton when we lost 3-1, rare moment of quality with a quality assist for Bellamy goal.

Man, you really must be a women. How on earth can it "clearly" be Carroll's fault we lost those games? So you're saying if he didn't play we would have won?

Another one.... "Yes its a flawed logic, doesnt stop others though"

D___C » Thu Mar 29, 2012 10:11 am wrote:i dont think u understand.. "Yes its a flawed logic, doesnt stop others though"

Ah, I see what you're getting at.

With all this "flawed logic" then, you're saying you'd be much happier if Carroll started our games instead of coming on as sub, such is this 'logic', you speak of. 

I put this in the Andy Carroll thread, but in answering the question of "can they co-exist?"

In 2012, Luis Suarez has only scored or made an assist when Carroll has been on the field at the same time.

Luis Suarez last 4 goals and also his last 4 assists have all come when Carroll's on the pitch.

Or to put it another way: In 2012 Luis Suarez has not scored or created an assist without Andy Corroll on the field.


So yes they can coexist.

Redman in Wales, that's an interesting statistic, one that I would have expected Martin Tyler to have picked up on this year (unless he has? I don't read his article that often). I believe Carroll and Suarez along with the addition of Gerrard have coexisted harmoniously on the pitch together and there is potential for a great partnership to develop. The question is, will that partnership guarantee goals? Luis Suarez for all his brilliance is not a natural goal scorer, neither is Carroll and Gerrard is nearly 32. You can argue that service this season hasn't been brilliant on the flanks with Downing and Henderson or in the middle with Lucas, Adam, Spearing and Gerrard, but we are craving out at times nearly thirty shots a match, so somewhere we're creating a plethora of chances, we're just not putting them away.

As much as I like Carroll, I think he's a square peg being shoved into a round hole and something will have to give sooner or later because this cannot carry on. Every time he performs well, he's substituted, left on the bench for the next game or left out of the squad altogether. He's scores a goal and is dropped for the next match. I just don't think he's in Kenny's long-terms plans and I don't believe Kenny or Clark know how to use Andy Carroll effectively which is why I believe he'll probably be offloaded in the summer for a knock down price.

I think we need a goal scorer someone who is going to get goals which is why I want us to sign someone like Fernando Llorente whose goal scoring tally for a small team like Bilbao is quite impressive, even Marseille's Loic Remy who we've been linked to in the past is an excellent finisher. I believe he has around 17 goals in 34 appearances for Marseille this season. Whoever we sign (if we sign anyone) they'll need to be able to feed off Suarez's ability of unlock defences, they'll need to put away the chances the team creates which is why I don't think we'll see the best form from Suarez until a Torres-esque type of goal scorer is brought in. Andy Carroll as much as I like him, just doesn't seem to have much of a future at Anfield.