Liverpool FC Forum

by **112-1077774096** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:01 am

we wouldn't necessarily have to start over again, maybe a new guy can get the best out of the quality that we have, maybe he will allow them to play football, so many maybes

by **Kharhaz** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:14 am

Havent Arsenal and Chelsea won the league by playing boring football? 1-0 to the ARSENAL was a regular song under George Graham. And Jose was known for having a good team but grinding out results. Id hang in with the grinding and rafa and then hopefully have a fully functioning Valencia-esque unit that he once had.

by **bigmick** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:15 am

Kharhaz wrote:Havent Arsenal and Chelsea won the league by playing boring football? 1-0 to the ARSENAL was a regular song under George Graham. And Jose was known for having a good team but grinding out results. Id hang in with the grinding and rafa and then hopefully have a fully functioning Valencia-esque unit that he once had.

Yeah I've gotta say that although the old flowing football would be nice, a few pragmatic 1-0 wins leading to a Premiership win wouldn't go amiss either. The substance has got to come before the style and I wouldn't necessarily criticise rafa for sticking to his counter attacking principles.

The problem is of course when teams sit back against you, particularly as it turns out this season at Anfield. That's where Saints tricky second striker comes in, or creative wide players. Ultimately though it's a question of balance, (this one's not a directional question Judgie, nor a rotational one

). Once the balance is out of kilter, both the defence and the attack tend to suffer.

If Arsenal get picked off on the break by Man Utd at the weekend, watch in the next game as they try and find their feet again, trying to make themselves commit forward in numbers. It happens to all teams, upset the equilebrium a bit and it takes a bit of time and effort to get the whole thing rolling once more.

Expecting us to play like arsenal though is cloud cuckoo land. If we win the title three years running under Rafa we wouldn't play like that in the following season. Nothing wrong with that either, that's just the way it is.

by **account deleted by request** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:45 am

bigmick wrote:
Kharhaz wrote:Havent Arsenal and Chelsea won the league by playing boring football? 1-0 to the ARSENAL was a regular song under George Graham. And Jose was known for having a good team but grinding out results. Id hang in with the grinding and rafa and then hopefully have a fully functioning Valencia-esque unit that he once had.

Yeah I've gotta say that although the old flowing football would be nice, a few pragmatic 1-0 wins leading to a Premiership win wouldn't go amiss either. The substance has got to come before the style and I wouldn't necessarily criticise rafa for sticking to his counter attacking principles.

The problem is of course when teams sit back against you, particularly as it turns out this season at Anfield. That's where Saints tricky second striker comes in, or creative wide players. Ultimately though it's a question of balance, (this one's not a directional question Judgie, nor a rotational one ). Once the balance is out of kilter, both the defence and the attack tend to suffer.

If Arsenal get picked off on the break by Man Utd at the weekend, watch in the next game as they try and find their feet again, trying to make themselves commit forward in numbers. It happens to all teams, upset the equilebrium a bit and it takes a bit of time and effort to get the whole thing rolling once more.

Expecting us to play like arsenal though is cloud cuckoo land. If we win the title three years running under Rafa we wouldn't play like that in the following season. Nothing wrong with that either, that's just the way it is.

I think balance is the key Bigmick. If Torres had been fit, I don't think you would have seen Arsenal throwing players forward with the same gay abandon as they did in the second half on Sunday.

While because of Hyypia's obvious problems, we seem almost happier without the ball at the moment. Players seem reluctant to press forward ,and support play seems to be forgotten. Players are being forced to do too much individually rather than as a team.

We worked hard as a team defensively against Arsenal but as an attacking force we left players isolated much too often, and without pace or skill up front, we were much too reliant on Gerrard breaking through.

by **maguskwt** » Thu Nov 01, 2007 5:20 am

s@int wrote:
bigmick wrote:
Kharhaz wrote:Havent Arsenal and Chelsea won the league by playing boring football? 1-0 to the ARSENAL was a regular song under George Graham. And Jose was known for having a good team but grinding out results. Id hang in with the grinding and rafa and then hopefully have a fully functioning Valencia-esque unit that he once had.

Yeah I've gotta say that although the old flowing football would be nice, a few pragmatic 1-0 wins leading to a Premiership win wouldn't go amiss either. The substance has got to come before the style and I wouldn't necessarily criticise rafa for sticking to his counter attacking principles.

The problem is of course when teams sit back against you, particularly as it turns out this season at Anfield. That's where Saints tricky second striker comes in, or creative wide players. Ultimately though it's a question of balance, (this one's not a directional question Judgie, nor a rotational one ). Once the balance is out of kilter, both the defence and the attack tend to suffer.

If Arsenal get picked off on the break by Man Utd at the weekend, watch in the next game as they try and find their feet again, trying to make themselves commit forward in numbers. It happens to all teams, upset the equilebrium a bit and it takes a bit of time and effort to get the whole thing rolling once more.

Expecting us to play like arsenal though is cloud cuckoo land. If we win the title three years running under Rafa we wouldn't play like that in the following season. Nothing wrong with that either, that's just the way it is.

I think balance is the key Bigmick. If Torres had been fit, I don't think you would have seen Arsenal throwing players forward with the same gay abandon as they did in the second half on Sunday.

While because of Hyypia's obvious problems, we seem almost happier without the ball at the moment. Players seem reluctant to press forward ,and support play seems to be forgotten. Players are being forced to do too much individually rather than as a team.

We worked hard as a team defensively against Arsenal but as an attacking force we left players isolated much too often, and without pace or skill up front, we were much too reliant on Gerrard breaking through.

good observation...

dont' agree with arsenal pressing more in the 2nd half though... I thought in 2nd half we managed to break up their play more except for the period that resulted in their goal... in the first half we were all over the place and were struggling just to contain them....

we really need alonso's cool and composed displays... he a calming influence IMO...

by **stmichael** » Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:31 pm

s@int wrote:because of Hyypia's obvious problems, we seem almost happier without the ball at the moment. Players seem reluctant to press forward ,and support play seems to be forgotten. Players are being forced to do too much individually rather than as a team.

We worked hard as a team defensively against Arsenal but as an attacking force we left players isolated much too often, and without pace or skill up front, we were much too reliant on Gerrard breaking through.

The frustrating thing is that we have a team all over the park who can't string a couple of decent passes together. If we had 11 men behind the ball, fair enough. That would tell us what to expect. But we have wingers in acres of space at times, who end up tracking back solely due to the fact that a teammate hasn't seen them, or hasn't been adept enough at releasing them.

I read an article recently which mentioned how sometimes psychology works in theses situations. The team will go on a bad run and players start to lose their confidence. Players then start to hide on the pitch by refusing any kind of responsibility. This is usually done by passing the ball at the first opportunity, no matter whether it's a good pass or not. The point is that the ball is gone and they can breath easy. And seeing as this type of play generally results in the other team intercepting the passes, a further blow is struck to the player's/team' morale. A vicious circle, if you like. Sadly, I think we are stuck in this rut at the moment.

When you see teams that play free flowing football, they're not afraid to concede a goal. The reason being because they know they'll have a chance to get a goal of their own if they carry on in the way they are playing. Liverpool are nowhere near that right now, and as much as it pains me to say it, we won't be getting there anytime soon.

by **maguskwt** » Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:59 pm

stmichael wrote:
s@int wrote:because of Hyypia's obvious problems, we seem almost happier without the ball at the moment. Players seem reluctant to press forward ,and support play seems to be forgotten. Players are being forced to do too much individually rather than as a team.

We worked hard as a team defensively against Arsenal but as an attacking force we left players isolated much too often, and without pace or skill up front, we were much too reliant on Gerrard breaking through.

The frustrating thing is that we have a team all over the park who can't string a couple of decent passes together. If we had 11 men behind the ball, fair enough. That would tell us what to expect. But we have wingers in acres of space at times, who end up tracking back solely due to the fact that a teammate hasn't seen them, or hasn't been adept enough at releasing them.

I read an article recently which mentioned how sometimes psychology works in theses situations. The team will go on a bad run and players start to lose their confidence. Players then start to hide on the pitch by refusing any kind of responsibility. This is usually done by passing the ball at the first opportunity, no matter whether it's a good pass or not. The point is that the ball is gone and they can breath easy. And seeing as this type of play generally results in the other team intercepting the passes, a further blow is struck to the player's/team' morale. A vicious circle, if you like. Sadly, I think we are stuck in this rut at the moment.

When you see teams that play free flowing football, they're not afraid to concede a goal. The reason being because they know they'll have a chance to get a goal of their own if they carry on in the way they are playing. Liverpool are nowhere near that right now, and as much as it pains me to say it, we won't be getting there anytime soon.

very possible explanation st. michael I been wondering the same thing why we can't string passes together...

by **stmichael** » Fri Nov 02, 2007 4:11 pm

maguskwt wrote:
stmichael wrote:
s@int wrote:because of Hyypia's obvious problems, we seem almost happier without the ball at the moment. Players seem reluctant to press forward ,and support play seems to be forgotten. Players are being forced to do too much individually rather than as a team.

We worked hard as a team defensively against Arsenal but as an attacking force we left players isolated much too often, and without pace or skill up front, we were much too reliant on Gerrard breaking through.

The frustrating thing is that we have a team all over the park who can't string a couple of decent passes together. If we had 11 men behind the ball, fair enough. That would tell us what to expect. But we have wingers in acres of space at times, who end up tracking back solely due to the fact that a teammate hasn't seen them, or hasn't been adept enough at releasing them.

I read an article recently which mentioned how sometimes psychology works in theses situations. The team will go on a bad run and players start to lose their confidence. Players then start to hide on the pitch by refusing any kind of responsibility. This is usually done by passing the ball at the first opportunity, no matter whether it's a good pass or not. The point is that the ball is gone and they can breath easy. And seeing as this type of play generally results in the other team intercepting the passes, a further blow is struck to the player's/team' morale. A vicious circle, if you like. Sadly, I think we are stuck in this rut at the moment.

When you see teams that play free flowing football, they're not afraid to concede a goal. The reason being because they know they'll have a chance to get a goal of their own if they carry on in the way they are playing. Liverpool are nowhere near that right now, and as much as it pains me to say it, we won't be getting there anytime soon.

very possible explanation st. michael I been wondering the same thing why we can't string passes together...

I think you see this lack of confidence and the cycle that ensues is often more prevalent with teams who pride themselves on their defence -- us, in other words. We lose confidence in our attacking ability and so desperately try and hold on to the things we think we're best at, defending and working hard.

Teams like Mancs and Arsenal can play their way out of rough patches more easily, I think, because their primary objective when they take the pitch is to score more goals than the opposition; our objective often seems to be to concede fewer goals than our opposition. It sounds like a subtle difference, but in terms of team psychology it can be huge.

by **Bammo** » Fri Nov 02, 2007 4:12 pm

I agree totally with that. Players with confidence aren't afraid to lose the ball. I'm sure most of us have played to some amateur level so know what it's like when confidence is low. You may see an opportunity for a great pass or to take on a player but the doubt in your mind means it's safer to lay it off 5 yards than risk it. Liverpool players are obviously under a lot more pressure than the average park player.

Remember how much stick Garcia used to get for giving it away in the final third? One credit to him was that he never stopped trying. At the moment our players are afraid to try things so they take the safe option - usually back.

Eventually it gets to the back four. None of the midfielders want the ball in case they lose it. The defender gets closed down so they are forced to play it long.

Ok, that's a bit simplified but hopefully it helps explain the point.

What we need is for our players to keep trying. Eventually something comes off, confidence rises and suddenly we're back to our best. It's been mentioned on other threads that injuries could help us and this is another example.

Crouch, Kewell etc have little to lose as they're out of favour so they may as well try the audacious. I get the impression that certain players (step forward Dirk) are so low on confidence their whole game is affected. They don't even make the offensive runs in case they mess up. After all, if they aren't there to miss then they can't get stick.

I'd much rather we persist with trying to play the Liverpool way, even if it means losing, than altering our style to fit players low on confidence (going defensive, long-ball etc).

by **account deleted by request** » Sun Nov 04, 2007 7:37 am

In answer to the question of who we could have as our next manager :-

JOSE CASTS A HUGE SHADOW OVER RAFA

Jose Mourinho

Sunday November 4,2007
By Harry Pratt
Jose Mourinho has been keeping a close eye on the pressure slowly building on Liverpool manager Rafa Benitez.

When he left Stamford Bridge in September, Mourinho insisted his next post would not be in England.

But that was before Benitez’s rotation policy cost Liverpool valuable ground in the Premier League, and left their Champions League hopes on the brink and the fans up in arms.

The Sunday Express has learned from sources in Portugal close to Mourinho that he has added the Anfield giants to his short list of possible clubs to manage next.

Our source confirmed: “There’s no question Liverpool is a club Jose would like to manage.”

Under his extremely generous severance terms with Chelsea, Mourinho cannot work in England until June.

But he believes that taking over from Benitez could be the most attractive option open to him because:

Liverpool have the financial power to compete with Europe’s elite.

The Kop are so fed up with the club’s title drought that they would welcome the Special One.
lIt would make Roman Abramovich even more jealous of Liverpool.

Only last week Mourinho emphasised his determination to hold out for one of Europe’s top jobs by rejecting Valencia, widely regarded as Spain’s third-largest club.

But unless Real Madrid or Barcelona come calling next summer, which is unlikely, his options will be limited to either of Italy’s Milan clubs – or Liverpool. News of Mourinho waiting in the wings is sure to rattle Kop boss Benitez, who has an intense dislike of the ex-Porto coach and is engulfed in a full-blown crisis on Merseyside.

Failure to beat Besiktas at home on Tuesday will end Liverpool’s Champions League interest – and further undermine the Spaniard’s standing at the club.

And unless he was to deliver the Premier League – a tough proposition with Arsenal and Manchester United both in great form – Benitez could well pay the price for blowing £50million last summer and leave the door open for Mourinho.

It was written by a Pratt...........

by **Torres 2007** » Sun Nov 04, 2007 1:59 pm

In answer to the original question,

Rafa SHOULD go at the end of the season, if the the following things happen.

1. We get knocked out of the Champions League group phase.

2. We are more than 10 points from top spot in the league come May. (or in at least 3rd position).

Gerard Houllier only got 4 seasons, and if we are a mile off the top, the we simply arent making progress.

Thats my take on it.

by **Bad Bob** » Sun Nov 04, 2007 2:01 pm

Torres 2007 wrote:Gerard Houllier only got 4 seasons, and if we are a mile off the top, the we simply arent making progress.

Check your facts, lad.

by **ivor_the_injun** » Sun Nov 04, 2007 2:07 pm

Torres 2007 wrote:In answer to the original question,

Rafa SHOULD go at the end of the season, if the the following things happen.

1. We get knocked out of the Champions League group phase.

2. We are more than 10 points from top spot in the league come May. (or in at least 3rd position).

Gerard Houllier only got 4 seasons, and if we are a mile off the top, the we simply arent making progress.

Thats my take on it.

If you're over the age of 13, then I will turn my computer off and go and eat my shoes.

by **NANNY RED** » Sun Nov 04, 2007 2:08 pm

Torres 2007 wrote:In answer to the original question,

Rafa SHOULD go at the end of the season, if the the following things happen.

1. We get knocked out of the Champions League group phase.

2. We are more than 10 points from top spot in the league come May. (or in at least 3rd position).

Gerard Houllier only got 4 seasons, and if we are a mile off the top, the we simply arent making progress.

Thats my take on it.

Im doubled up laughing here

Where do these people come from

by **stmichael** » Sun Nov 04, 2007 2:42 pm

I can't help but think more strategically on managers and what happens when they get recycled.

If we finish 5th and win nothing, is that a poor season for Rafa? Yes.

but:

Do we want another 4 year rebuilding period starting from scratch? No.

Is a change of manager the only difference between us being a 5th placed team and a league championship winning team? No.

Are there other managers who would bring a substantial and immediate change to our performances? No.

Is there a huge difference (in terms of ability) between Ferguson, Wenger, Rafa, Mourinho, Capello, Ancelotti, Scolari etc? No.

My theory is the manager isn't as important a cog in the machine as people (and certainly the gutter press) would have you believe, when they go on about sackings etc to sell their newspapers. I think the most important role of a manager and his backroom team is to give the playing staff consistency and stability.

Changing players/tactics/club funding have all been proven to increase the success of football teams, but I am not convinced that just swapping one Grade A manager for another Grade A manager has ever changed a clubs fortunes.

In summary: I wouldn't swap Rafa for anyone in the next 5-10 years.

Liverpool FC Forum

I take my life in my hands - Should rafa go?

I take my life in my hands - Should rafa go!

Who is online