Liverpool FC Forum

by **2520years** » Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:20 am

Most LFC fans will agree that when our defence has been settled we've found ourselves keeping clean sheets for fun. Hyppia and Henchoz are a good example, as are Hyppia and Carra.

My question for the good people of this forum (and the rest of you), is should we try to let our strikers forge partnerships too? For example, decide that we'll start with Nando/Cisse OR Robbie/Crouch (or whichever combinations you fancy). These teams could effectively compete with each other to stay in the side so there'd be competition for places and also they'd get to know each other's games better so they could link up better. I remember Cole and Yorke knew each other's games and were almost telepathic, and that's an almost impossible prospect to defend against. The pairs of strikers could also train together and would be encouraged to talk about ways of linking up. This doesn't mean we couldn't substitute one with 20 minutes to go, as is the custom, just that we'd start with one pairing or the other.

I know defensive partnerships are more important than any other, but what do you think about attacking partnerships? Has anyone come across this before?
:idea

by **el_stinger** » Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:59 am

I'm gonna have a crack..

Owen-Heskey combo worked for one reason: Owen scored from any half chances he got from Heskey. Although Heskey didn't score much, he did hold the ball up and fend off defenders with his strength.

The Owen-Fowler combo didn't work as much towards the end, simply because one of them would be injured most of the time, or coming back from injury. This was the preferred combo early in Houllier's reign, until GH got fed up with Fowler's constant injuries and made the Owen-Heskey combo his preference.

When you have your strikers in rotation, it could either prove disastrous or could work for you. More often than not, it does disturb the way the squad goes about their business on the pitch, and it makes others more aware of who they are playing with. If you have a stabilised squad, players will play to each other's strengths, and that is the key to success.

While we have many new personnel on the pitch, we are still waiting for that chain to link up well, for a well oiled machine, for a team that will grind out result after result even if they are not producing great football. This is what Chelsea have, what Arsenal had, what Man Ure had, what Spurs have, what we are lacking.

So to answer your question, yes, we should stick with a regular 11, but we don't have that 11 that is that well oiled machine yet, and until we do, we will continue to rotate our players because they give us different options.

by **redmikey** » Thu Feb 09, 2006 11:09 am

toshack and keegan.

before my time but i have seen them messin around on tv when people thought they were linked by telepathy by toshack could see the cards keegan was holding up in the reflection.

it has to be a good thing to player together, forging and understanding learning each others runs .... but imo good players don't need that kind of thing you wouldn't see henry taking time to settle in at barca or rooney and owen at england because they would have done it in training a couple of times and that is all they need. defence requires more time because they are working as a unit of four, all pushing out at the same time or holding the line. where as attackers are more single minded.

so to cut a long answer down .. no i don't think it is that important

by **woof woof !** » Thu Feb 09, 2006 11:55 am

There are two main schools of thought when it comes to the question of rotation .On the one hand there's the "Always field your best available eleven" and on the other there's "In the modern game with so many matches coming thick and fast you need to rest and rotate players"

I'm in the "field your best eleven" camp . Thats not to suggest we would see the same eleven week after week as cetain players could be considered the best in their position for a premiership game whilst others maybe be considered the better player for a match in europe .

Playing together on a regular basis certainly forges a better understanding between players but having said that Chelsea for example change their line up at will and still get the results they're looking for .

I guess the bottom line is, for me at least, if the squad has sufficient talent in depth the benefits of rotation (fitter fresher and hungrier players) outweigh the advantage of the understanding forged by fielding a regular eleven .If however the quality of the squad is suspect when you go beyond the top 11 or so players then staying with your best eleven would seem to the best option .Managers often say "we take it one game at a time" (and I agree) but in the next breath talk about the amount of vital games they will be playing in the next couple of weeks ! . It baffles me .

I'm not sure who Rafa considers to be his best eleven , certainly the left back position changes from game to game ,Warnock ,then Riise , then Traore then around we go again .are the changes in that position due to Rafa's assessment of a players form ? ability ? fitness ? or his tactical response to a forthcoming game ? I honestly don't know .Certainly when it comes to the forwards Rafa appears to now favour Crouch/Morientes as his prime partnership (well for 60 or so minutes at least

) .It's certainly the weakest part of the team at present ,I think any combination will still fall far short of being the regular goal scoring machine that we desperately desire .Morientes and Cisse despite their reputations just don't appear capable of making it happen for themselves or LFC. Robbie at present is no more than a stop gap and it remains to be seen whether he becomes more than that.Crouch certainly has a future with us ,despite his lack of goals he does as has often been said bring other excellent qualities to the team .
We've spent a lot of time these last months talking about how we need a RM and Center Mid ,for me right now it's glaringly obvious that when looking beyond this season we are in desperate need of at least one maybe two new strikers who know where the goal is and how to hit it. Maybe then we'll find the combination we're looking for.

by **Big Niall** » Thu Feb 09, 2006 4:38 pm

Rotation is total rubbish - end of debate.

Frank Lampard plays every game for Chelsea and covers more area than most players. Rafa MUST decide who his best 11 is and play them every game. Ok the odd rest for one game every 3 months or so is understandable.

A striker needs to know how the other player works.

Mourinho rarely changes his team (unless forced) and he has a massive squad.

Rafa's biggest (one of very few) failures at LFC was to land Owen or another striker worthy of the name. No player at LFC has shown that he can score goals since Rafa got job. He needs to decide who is best and play them every game so they can get a rythm, trying to please them all won't work.

by **115-1073096938** » Thu Feb 09, 2006 6:37 pm

Big Niall wrote:Rotation is total rubbish - end of debate.

Frank Lampard plays every game for Chelsea and covers more area than most players. Rafa MUST decide who his best 11 is and play them every game. Ok the odd rest for one game every 3 months or so is understandable.

A striker needs to know how the other player works.

Mourinho rarely changes his team (unless forced) and he has a massive squad.

Rafa's biggest (one of very few) failures at LFC was to land Owen or another striker worthy of the name. No player at LFC has shown that he can score goals since Rafa got job. He needs to decide who is best and play them every game so they can get a rythm, trying to please them all won't work.

Frank Lampard has an exceptional natural fitness level.

I agree Rafa rotates far to much, but to say rotation is rubbish and wrong is quite a statement.

Of course its not ideal, but to expect players to play at there best 10 times in a row is extreme, the idea of rotation is to help players keep there level of performance and not play them when they hit "bad patches".

by **2520years** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 10:12 am

I think the general feeling is that some rotation is necessary, but it's over-used. Now who's going to write to Rafa and tell him what we've decided?

by **Rastalovich** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 7:44 pm

I know it`s not gonna happen, and I know there`s been too many changes up to now to go back.

But I prefered 11 a side with 1/3 subs.

As `progress` has come along, I don`t think the managers emphasis having an outstanding first team rather a good squad, and usually adapt their teams to suit who they play. When in reality, if u`r that good, other teams should adapt to u. But there we go.

Some players work well in a squad, other would probably be better starting every game. An outstanding striker would prefer to play 65 games a season, as in the clubs of the past. It`d be interesting to know how the likes of Cisse or maybe even Baros would fair in a team starting every game, I`m not sure Baros has had that chance. I feel alot of managers are eager to yank a player after not scoring for 5 games or so, probably just the same as managers like to play strikers even if they`re :censored:

! and not admit to leaving them out. ffs.

Tricky, AH would prefer 14 man team, 18 man squad, play all games ~75, win all the league and cups at the same time.

.. and back then they did

by **2520years** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:21 pm

I still think we should encourage attacking partnerships. At the end of the season we should sell off Nando and Cisse, recall Flo and buy a player like Kuyt to play with him.

Two partnerships:
Crouch - Robbie
Flo - Kuyt
Depending on the team we are up against e.g. are they vulnerable in the air or to pace, do they defend a high line or drop deep...

Liverpool FC Forum

Rotation schmotation - Just a thought...

Who is online