Liverpool FC Forum

bigmick wrote:Usually when people post up that you need to be at the ground to fully appreciate what's going on I tend to disagree. I go to a few games ( though not all involving Liverpool ) and often have to check up on the box later to confirm what I think I've seen. I'm probably sad but I quite enjoy watching football on the telly, I've never been one for big screens in Pubs and some fool chirping in you ear when he clearly hasn't even a basic notion of whats going on. In the game yesterday though I wish I had been there and not watching it on the box because I have not the faintest idea what our formation was.
That Kromkamp and Warnock were encouraged to get forward is not in doubt. Whether I would go as far as to describe their roles as wing-backs though is in doubt given that Cisse barely moved off the right touchline and Kewell in the main played left side. Kewells role infact was most bizarre, he appeared to be just drifting in and out of areas whenever he felt like it, even finding himself on the edge of our box at times.
Whatever the formation was supposed to be it worked really well but I would urge a note of caution on three fronts.
Firstly it has to be said that Newcastle are a poor side at the moment. Shearer is someway past his sell-by date and  their defence is probably the worst in the Prem apart from Sunderland. Were it not for Scott Parker and Shay Given they would nye-on get relegated.
Secondly, there are a couple of obvious flaws in a three centre back system which are well known and documented. We caught Newcastle by surprise yesterday but teams with a bit more ability and in posession of a more knowledgeable coach would exploit the weaknesses more often than not.

As a footnote the obvious flaws are thus: if you play any system which increases numbers in an area of the pitch without taking necessity into account there is a danger that players will abdicate responsibility and the job in hand won't get done. That is to say (and Newcastle's goal yesterday was a perfect example) when a ball gets played in, wrongly assuming there is safety in numbers players don't react as they should. Everyone looks at each other and nobody marks the centre forward, leading to the inexplicable situation where with three centre halves marking two forwards you have a goalscorer with not a defender within ten yards of him. This can be eradicated or reduced with practice but clever forwards will move from one marker to another, causing themselves to get "passed" between central defenders. When working in tandem with a clever strike partner and employing criss-cross movement it can get very difficult to keep track of who's actually supposed to be the spare man at the back.
The other obvious flaw of 5-3-2, or 3-5-2 is that teams tend to encourage their strikers to work the channels more than they do normally, hitting them long and exploiting the areas in behind where the full backs would normally operate. It gives you a great big out-ball when playing it out from the back, with the net result being that in order to counteract the ploy, you end up getting your full-backs "pinned"  alongside your centre-halves and playing a rigid 5-3-2 while getting overrun in midfield. It weas a ploy which Hoddle was very fond of while he was England manager but the better teams will always find it out in my view.
It's a system I'd keep in the locker but bring out only occasionally.

ivor_the_injun wrote:I'll be interested to see what formation Rafa plays in the Cup now. If anything, I'd say a 3-5-2 or 5-3-2 is more tailor made for one-off cup football than for the league.

The Ace1983 wrote:A good weapon to have in the arsenal.


patrick viera

but he's gone