Liverpool FC Forum

s@int wrote:Rafa's numbers just don't add up
20:51pm 8th October 2007

Study the extended sequence of numbers below and see if you can crack this week's sporting enigma code. The puzzle is: 6, 6, 4, 7, 5, 5, 6, 2, 9, 7, 5, 5.

Any ideas? No, it's not some tedious Sudoku grid. It isn't Stephen Hawking's chassis number. It's got nothing to do with bingo either, although it is associated with a lottery of sorts.

The sequence actually details the extraordinary number of changes made by Liverpool manager Rafa Benitez in every game this season.

Following victory over Aston Villa on the opening day, the Anfield boss has chopped his personnel around so often that he is averaging more than five changes per match.

When his team is winning, this squad rotation policy can be seen as an astute management of resources. But when Liverpool struggle, Benitez is cast as a man trying to solve a Rubik's cube despite being colour blind.

Fiddling for fiddling's sake doesn't provide an answer, as another magnificent statistic demonstrates; one so startling it deserves to be served on a silver platter and accompanied by a glass of vintage red. In a total of 153 matches, Benitez has named an unchanged side only once.

So what happened that week? What was different? The momentous occasion, which deserves to be commemorated by The Kop in song, occurred last season on Tuesday, October 31, 2006 — three days after Liverpool had beaten Villa at home.

On that night, Benitez confounded everyone by selecting the same 11 against Bordeaux in the Champions League, a wild and crazy notion that was rewarded with a 3-0 victory.

Afterwards the Liverpool manager justified this behaviour, saying: 'I thought if we are playing well, we have the confidence and we have time, then we can use the same team.'

Brilliantly simple. But not so brilliantly simple that he ever tried it again. And if that was his rationale back then, are we to presume that he hasn't opted for the same line up again because his side hasn't been playing well in the intervening period? Not even after beating Derby 6-0? Or was Benitez being contrary for a more selfish reason that night?

The Bordeaux game was his 99th in charge and it is more likely his selection had less to do with fitness and more to do with him wanting to dodge headlines referring to a 'century of tinkering'.

Whatever the reasoning, all this twisting and turning is obviously not doing much good right now. It's not so much a rotation policy as a tragic roundabout.

Liverpool have picked up one League victory since September 1 and a single point from six in the Champions League.

The devil in any successful operation is in the detail and Benitez analyses the data more than most. As he sifted through the debris of another disjointed performance against Tottenham on Sunday, he spared nobody. Except himself, that is.

'We need to learn,' he seethed. 'The small details change games.' And indeed they do. The smallest of details can make the difference between a win, a trophy, a title, or absolutely nothing at all. But how can players concentrate on the small details when they are having to double-guess who will be playing alongside them week in and week out?

A team succeeds by building an almost telepathic understanding on the field, forging instinctive relationships that enable them to trust and react to one another without a second thought.

That doesn't follow when the numbers on the teamsheet look as if they have been plucked off a roulette wheel. Right now, the Liverpool players look like strangers to one another. They are spinning in and out of the team so often they are bound to be a little disorientated.

Yes, it can all click for a cup run, and there is silverware enough in the cabinet to excuse Benitez from criticism in a knockout scenario.

But the League requires consistency, team spirit, self-belief and a certainty that the best 11 equipped for the job are on the field, with reinforcements on hand if required. Isn't that how titles are won?

This Anfield scenario might sound horribly familiar. Liverpool have certainly been cursed by the revolving door approach to selection before.

In 2002, Gerard Houllier managed to go two years without sending out the same side in consecutive matches. He also had success in cup competitions but, like Benitez, never found the consistency required to succeed in the League.

History is now repeating itself and at a moment when Liverpool were supposed to have their best chance of being crowned champions in almost two decades.

Benitez is an astute, intelligent manager and even in this sticky patch of form it is worth remembering Liverpool have yet to lose a league match, so this mini slump hardly ranks as a crisis.

However, there is no doubt the manager has put himself in a difficult situation when he has to stubbornly insist his complicated calculations are right, even though they keep spewing out the wrong results. Benitez may even be close to the ideal winning formula by now but if it happened, how would anyone be able to tell?

bigmick wrote:I thought that as well TBH. Infact it could have been practically written by my good self given the content.

Edit: Actually my mistake I was on about the one that Judge quoted. This one is a bit more stato than my style,  it's a brutal take on rotation though all the same. That number sequence is absolutely frightening, even given the fact that we've mixed it around a bit for the Carling Cup/Champions League.

Leonmc0708 wrote:

bigmick wrote:I thought that as well TBH. Infact it could have been practically written by my good self given the content.

Edit: Actually my mistake I was on about the one that Judge quoted. This one is a bit more stato than my style,  it's a brutal take on rotation though all the same. That number sequence is absolutely frightening, even given the fact that we've mixed it around a bit for the Carling Cup/Champions League.

and the way it drones on and on . . . .

It's a fair point you make mate. Now all he has to do is reword the thing without actually changing the content in any way shape of form, and post it up in it's various guises 431 times over a period of about six weeks and he might be onto something. He might want to make it longer and a bit less exciting though if he's going for real Micky authenticity.

bigmick wrote:

Leonmc0708 wrote:

bigmick wrote:I thought that as well TBH. Infact it could have been practically written by my good self given the content.

Edit: Actually my mistake I was on about the one that Judge quoted. This one is a bit more stato than my style,  it's a brutal take on rotation though all the same. That number sequence is absolutely frightening, even given the fact that we've mixed it around a bit for the Carling Cup/Champions League.

and the way it drones on and on . . . .

It's a fair point you make mate. Now all he has to do is reword the thing without actually changing the content in any way shape of form, and post it up in it's various guises 431 times over a period of about six weeks and he might be onto something. He might want to make it longer and a bit less exciting though if he's going for real Micky authenticity.

peewee wrote:doesn't matter if it drones, its raising some very good points and should b accepted as a good piece of work, I don't see any lies there, i don't see any sensationalism, just good solid truths

Leonmc0708 wrote:How about the point about Rafa not changing the side cus he didnt want the papers to say he did it for the 100th time ?

Thats neither truth nor a good point, its just bolloc.ks

I must confess I always had that one game of non-rotation down as two fingers up to the press from rafa, taking the p!ss out of them and fair play to the bloke for it. If that was never the case i stand corrected although it does appear to be something of a coincidence 

Perhaps there is a reason for it that wasn't made public at the time.

Leonmc0708 wrote:

peewee wrote:doesn't matter if it drones, its raising some very good points and should b accepted as a good piece of work, I don't see any lies there, i don't see any sensationalism, just good solid truths

How about the point about Rafa not changing the side cus he didnt want the papers to say he did it for the 100th time ?

Thats neither truth nor a good point, its just bolloc.ks

oooo one line   

the figures are correct and the words 'more likely' show its not factual but just a guess on the writers part, thats not a lie

LittleHobo wrote:the problem is our rotation system is a laughing stock now

fair enough if we were top but we aint.

our team doesnt look like a team and rotation is the reason

Leonmc0708 wrote:

LittleHobo wrote:the problem is our rotation system is a laughing stock now

fair enough if we were top but we aint.

our team doesnt look like a team and rotation is the reason

In a nut shell ?