Liverpool FC Forum

StuYesThatStu » Sun Oct 20, 2013 11:04 pm wrote:

Benny The Noon » Sun Oct 20, 2013 9:34 pm wrote:It's good buying players for the future like Hughes but we need players for the now. Established players.

And if your looking at Southampton then I would prefer to look at Lallana and Wanyama

And I think Morrison is this years Cleverly - another youngster who scores a good goal and does well but then gets over hyped.

That comment proves you've either never seen Morrison play, or don't have a clue about football.

Which one is it?

Kenny Kan » Mon Oct 21, 2013 2:31 am wrote:Unfortunately I don't think it was complete rubbish and had valid points.

The system against Newcastle was our undoing, the same system which we used against Palace and getting analysed in the article.

The 3 cb's leave us a man short elsewhere on the pitch, notably in midfield where our options and lack of movement becomes a disadvantage because the extra player is at the back - that's why we couldn't control the game. It wasn't until Sahko came off and we reverted to 4 at the back for Alberto, when we finally started to press them back and dominate proceedings. Prior to this, the whole system played into Newcastle's hands, hindered us hence why we never got going - nothing clicked. Even with Coutinho in for the ineffective Moses we'd still be a numerical player short in the midfield and this would increase the opponents advantage to close us down better and make us huff and puff our way through attacks.

Rodgers needs to go to four at the back, still allowing the fullbacks to bomb on, with the extra man back in midfield to give us more options and to make it harder for teams to close us down.

4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 would be the better formations to go with and I think Rodgers will change this for WBA, or at least he should do.

Benny The Noon » Mon Oct 21, 2013 7:42 am wrote:

Kenny Kan » Mon Oct 21, 2013 2:31 am wrote:Unfortunately I don't think it was complete rubbish and had valid points.

The system against Newcastle was our undoing, the same system which we used against Palace and getting analysed in the article.

The 3 cb's leave us a man short elsewhere on the pitch, notably in midfield where our options and lack of movement becomes a disadvantage because the extra player is at the back - that's why we couldn't control the game. It wasn't until Sahko came off and we reverted to 4 at the back for Alberto, when we finally started to press them back and dominate proceedings. Prior to this, the whole system played into Newcastle's hands, hindered us hence why we never got going - nothing clicked. Even with Coutinho in for the ineffective Moses we'd still be a numerical player short in the midfield and this would increase the opponents advantage to close us down better and make us huff and puff our way through attacks.

Rodgers needs to go to four at the back, still allowing the fullbacks to bomb on, with the extra man back in midfield to give us more options and to make it harder for teams to close us down.

4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 would be the better formations to go with and I think Rodgers will change this for WBA, or at least he should do.

No team has won anything significant playing 3 at the back with wingbacks in the Prem. I don't think it will work for us long term and hope we revert to the 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 formation. I think BR went to 3 at the back because when he bought Sahko the form of Skrtel was good and couldn't drop him so found a way to fit the players. 

You have it spot IMO in terms of numbers in the middle of the park

But which team with enough quality has actually used the 3-5-2 in the Prem? It might not have been successful in England but in recent times it has been very successful in Italy for example.

I don't really agree about the numbers in midfield. Yes, we might have an extra man in defense, but the ones that should be making the numbers in midfield are the fullbacks. People tend to think that the offensive job of a modern fullback is just to bomb forward and be the extra man in the final third, but it isn't or it shouldn't be, especially if you want to play a 3-5-2. Their job is to support the midfield as well. That might sound like it's asking too much from the fullbacks but that's why it's a job for your most energetic and fittest players. Just look at Juventus. They have Lichsteiner at RWB, who's energy is second to none (in the world) and does a great job in all areas on the pitch, while at LWB they have Asamoah, a former midfielder who is also very energetic and significantly helps the midfield both in quantity and quality. This is why I thought Hendo would do a good job for us as RWB but it didn't work out. Our fullbacks on the other hand, tend to constantly bomb forward even when the circumstances don't allow it, which ends in him running into blind alleys (Johnson), or unnecessary waste possession by hoofing it forward when he could have just made a simple pass (Enrique). Also, both of them don't have enough energy to play in that role and do 3 jobs IMO. Definitely not Johnson at least.

The 3-5-2 is a very good formation, especially for the way that we want to play, but at the moment we're just not using it as we should. 

Cissoko was awful going forward and Johnson didn't fare any better.

Kenny Kan » Mon Oct 21, 2013 12:14 pm wrote:

But which team with enough quality has actually used the 3-5-2 in the Prem? It might not have been successful in England but in recent times it has been very successful in Italy for example.

I don't really agree about the numbers in midfield. Yes, we might have an extra man in defense, but the ones that should be making the numbers in midfield are the fullbacks. People tend to think that the offensive job of a modern fullback is just to bomb forward and be the extra man in the final third, but it isn't or it shouldn't be, especially if you want to play a 3-5-2. Their job is to support the midfield as well. That might sound like it's asking too much from the fullbacks but that's why it's a job for your most energetic and fittest players. Just look at Juventus. They have Lichsteiner at RWB, who's energy is second to none (in the world) and does a great job in all areas on the pitch, while at LWB they have Asamoah, a former midfielder who is also very energetic and significantly helps the midfield both in quantity and quality. This is why I thought Hendo would do a good job for us as RWB but it didn't work out. Our fullbacks on the other hand, tend to constantly bomb forward even when the circumstances don't allow it, which ends in him running into blind alleys (Johnson), or unnecessary waste possession by hoofing it forward when he could have just made a simple pass (Enrique). Also, both of them don't have enough energy to play in that role and do 3 jobs IMO. Definitely not Johnson at least.

The 3-5-2 is a very good formation, especially for the way that we want to play, but at the moment we're just not using it as we should. 

When you play 3-5-2 you essentially ask you wing backs to play as wingers, i.e. they are the focal point of the flanks. Neither, Enrique or Cissoko are up to this, and even Johnson looked lost out there. "Fullbacks", double up and overlap which is what Enrique and Johnson do best. Making them become the lone attacking winger sees them pretty much lost, Cissoko was awful going forward and Johnson didn't fare any better.

Another reason why we should revert to a back for with our fullbacks pushing on and supporting midfielders in wider areas, not leaving them the job they are incapable of, to do it alone.

Kenny Kan » Mon Oct 21, 2013 12:14 pm wrote:

But which team with enough quality has actually used the 3-5-2 in the Prem? It might not have been successful in England but in recent times it has been very successful in Italy for example.

I don't really agree about the numbers in midfield. Yes, we might have an extra man in defense, but the ones that should be making the numbers in midfield are the fullbacks. People tend to think that the offensive job of a modern fullback is just to bomb forward and be the extra man in the final third, but it isn't or it shouldn't be, especially if you want to play a 3-5-2. Their job is to support the midfield as well. That might sound like it's asking too much from the fullbacks but that's why it's a job for your most energetic and fittest players. Just look at Juventus. They have Lichsteiner at RWB, who's energy is second to none (in the world) and does a great job in all areas on the pitch, while at LWB they have Asamoah, a former midfielder who is also very energetic and significantly helps the midfield both in quantity and quality. This is why I thought Hendo would do a good job for us as RWB but it didn't work out. Our fullbacks on the other hand, tend to constantly bomb forward even when the circumstances don't allow it, which ends in him running into blind alleys (Johnson), or unnecessary waste possession by hoofing it forward when he could have just made a simple pass (Enrique). Also, both of them don't have enough energy to play in that role and do 3 jobs IMO. Definitely not Johnson at least.

The 3-5-2 is a very good formation, especially for the way that we want to play, but at the moment we're just not using it as we should. 

When you play 3-5-2 you essentially ask you wing backs to play as wingers, i.e. they are the focal point of the flanks. Neither, Enrique or Cissoko are up to this, and even Johnson looked lost out there. "Fullbacks", double up and overlap which is what Enrique and Johnson do best. Making them become the lone attacking winger sees them pretty much lost, Cissoko was awful going forward and Johnson didn't fare any better.

Another reason why we should revert to a back for with our fullbacks pushing on and supporting midfielders in wider areas, not leaving them the job they are incapable of, to do it alone.

woof woof ! » Mon Oct 21, 2013 11:39 am wrote:

Cissoko was awful going forward and Johnson didn't fare any better.

Agree on Cissokho KK but thought Johnson did ok, broke into the box twice and got shots away that on another day we've seen him stick away.

Not that I'm totally sold on 3-5-2 but maybe the problem is not the formation but the personnel that are being asked to play it ?

StuYesThatStu » Mon Oct 21, 2013 3:20 pm wrote:

Kenny Kan » Mon Oct 21, 2013 12:14 pm wrote:

But which team with enough quality has actually used the 3-5-2 in the Prem? It might not have been successful in England but in recent times it has been very successful in Italy for example.

I don't really agree about the numbers in midfield. Yes, we might have an extra man in defense, but the ones that should be making the numbers in midfield are the fullbacks. People tend to think that the offensive job of a modern fullback is just to bomb forward and be the extra man in the final third, but it isn't or it shouldn't be, especially if you want to play a 3-5-2. Their job is to support the midfield as well. That might sound like it's asking too much from the fullbacks but that's why it's a job for your most energetic and fittest players. Just look at Juventus. They have Lichsteiner at RWB, who's energy is second to none (in the world) and does a great job in all areas on the pitch, while at LWB they have Asamoah, a former midfielder who is also very energetic and significantly helps the midfield both in quantity and quality. This is why I thought Hendo would do a good job for us as RWB but it didn't work out. Our fullbacks on the other hand, tend to constantly bomb forward even when the circumstances don't allow it, which ends in him running into blind alleys (Johnson), or unnecessary waste possession by hoofing it forward when he could have just made a simple pass (Enrique). Also, both of them don't have enough energy to play in that role and do 3 jobs IMO. Definitely not Johnson at least.

The 3-5-2 is a very good formation, especially for the way that we want to play, but at the moment we're just not using it as we should. 

When you play 3-5-2 you essentially ask you wing backs to play as wingers, i.e. they are the focal point of the flanks. Neither, Enrique or Cissoko are up to this, and even Johnson looked lost out there. "Fullbacks", double up and overlap which is what Enrique and Johnson do best. Making them become the lone attacking winger sees them pretty much lost, Cissoko was awful going forward and Johnson didn't fare any better.

Another reason why we should revert to a back for with our fullbacks pushing on and supporting midfielders in wider areas, not leaving them the job they are incapable of, to do it alone.

And the player who plays behind the striker is the person to help out the wide players. Thats exactly the point. The player behind the striker is your left and right winger and that is what makes the system work, or allows it to fail. Moses is nowhere near good enough to perform this role, he can't even play on one wing during a game, let alone two.

IF you remember the way McManaman used to play that role? To be fair its unfair to compare McManaman to Moses because McManaman was a quality footballer, Moses isn't.

3-5-2 allows you numbers in midfield, attack and defense used properly. Its a system the Germans, Italians and Brazilians have based their philosophy on for years with slight variations.

Rodgers is using the 3-5-2 because it allows him to play Suarez up front with Sturridge without losing the numbers in midfield.

Anyone who believes the system is to blame for poor performances is mis guided. The players we have in that system aren't good enough.

Kenny Kan » Mon Oct 21, 2013 10:51 pm wrote:
Whatever the argument you essentially agree that this system doesn't get the best out of our players.

If you draw Moses out wide as you say, you are only left with two in midfield. If Moses was up top flanking Sturridge in a wide position with Enrique pushing on, you'd still have 3 midfielders in and around the middle - with 4 at the back.

That's what having the 3rd cb back does, it takes a man from elsewhere as opposed to having 2 cb's.