Liverpool FC Forum

by **Leonmc0708** » Sun Nov 04, 2007 12:33 am

Bamaga man wrote:
Doesn't sound as if Warnock was a lover of rotation!

Coming from a player who was part of the rotational chaos, we can definately say it is "comical". Warnock wouldnt be the only player thinking that either I reckon.

I hate to say it but rotation will be Rafa's downfall, it seems the players cant even get their heads around it. And I dont blame him for moving on, he's playing regular football now and would improve himself into form, not that he ever got the chance here.

He was decent enough, probably not to hold down a place but then again like he said he could never find his groove in the side as he was in and out all the time.

When Rafa leaves and eventually Carra or Gerrard or someone else brings out a biography, I bet they'll slate his rotation policy.

Rotational Chaos ?

Get a grip Bamage lad, I bet when you run out of bog roll mid wipe at your gaff its the end of the world.

Also, I know who I would trust to tell me about management out of the following:

1) An experienced manager who has won league titles and European trophies.

2) An average squad player with an axe to grind with a manager who felt he was not good enough.

by **66-1112520797** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:05 pm

Get a grip Bamage lad, I bet when you run out of bog roll mid wipe at your gaff its the end of the world.

Unlike you who probably says: 'Its all good, no need to worry, I'll just carry on wiping with me bare hand'

by **Judge** » Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:59 pm

Bamaga man wrote:
Get a grip Bamage lad, I bet when you run out of bog roll mid wipe at your gaff its the end of the world.

Unlike you who probably says: 'Its all good, no need to worry, I'll just carry on wiping with me bare hand'

bamage

by **neilE** » Fri Nov 09, 2007 4:34 pm

topic inspired by something I read in Times online - apparently Rafa may start with an unchanged team on Saturday. I have however been thinking about this for a while. The anti-rotationists on here say we need to keep the spine of the team. In answer, down the middle of the side Reina, Carragher, Agger (when fit), Gerrard, Torres (when fit) play every game. Also playing most games are Finnan, Riise, Pennant, Kuyt, Mascherano, Alonso, again as long as they're fit. Arbeloa, Babel, Benayoun, Crouch, Voronin are players who can and do come in and fill positions when needed. The rest are cover for injuries, and to play league cup games for experience etc. Now, you can argue that some of the players normally picked shouldn't be, and vice versa, but it looks to me as though Benitez is looking to keep a settled spine with other players coming in and out depending on fitness form and tactics. I don't believe that the mad rotation described by the press and some on here is nearly as bad as is made out. Cue abuse from Bamaga man, Peewee etc..................

sorry Bob - now in proper spot!

by **Owzat** » Sun Nov 11, 2007 11:12 am

Was Rafa right to keep the same XI? It wasn't like we played Wednesday and then Saturday lunchtime, but we did run the risk of players being a bit jaded. Still we created enough chances before Torres came on, but he was the breakthrough and I think I'm right in saying that's his first goal as a substitute

by **66-1112520797** » Sun Nov 11, 2007 11:24 am

Yes he was right to keep the same team, come the 24th Torres should be in for Voronin against Newcastle.

Put it this way if we'd have lost the "anti-rotationalist" cult would of been all over this saying .... 'See rotation isnt the problem' they know who they are.

by **account deleted by request** » Sun Nov 11, 2007 11:51 am

Bamaga man wrote:Yes he was right to keep the same team, come the 24th Torres should be in for Voronin against Newcastle.

Put it this way if we'd have lost the "anti-rotationalist" cult would of been all over this saying .... 'See rotation isnt the problem' they know who they are.

We only scored AFTER Rafa rotated though mate

by **66-1112520797** » Sun Nov 11, 2007 11:59 am

s@int wrote:
Bamaga man wrote:Yes he was right to keep the same team, come the 24th Torres should be in for Voronin against Newcastle.

Put it this way if we'd have lost the "anti-rotationalist" cult would of been all over this saying .... 'See rotation isnt the problem' they know who they are.

We only scored AFTER Rafa rotated though mate

No that was 'substituted' mate.

by **account deleted by request** » Sun Nov 11, 2007 12:23 pm

by **Sabre** » Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:16 pm

Braga man says in the fourth page of the match thread

Sabre I would of thought that anyone with a head the size of yours would have had more brains, but the more you post the more I see that large cranium compartment holding 90% of water on your overloaded brain.

Then Braga-man says here

Yes he was right to keep the same team, come the 24th Torres should be in for Voronin against Newcastle.

Put it this way if we'd have lost the "anti-rotationalist" cult would of been all over this saying .... 'See rotation isnt the problem' they know who they are.

Then, after reading all this, seeing your dumb face and the one of your mateys, I must say, Stop talking bóllocks you ignorant

We didn't play any better, nor any worse repeating the same squad. It was a decent-good performance, we have played better than that, and worse than that aswell.

Should Torres had not made a finishing worth his money (see? I can praise him now and you cannot call me biased

) you lot, you know who you are would be asking for Rafa's head and wouldn't be acknowledging we did a decent game. So shut up, will you? In fact, we did create and fail more chances in other games, until the goal, it was not our best game precisely. We were not far of not getting the 3 points we needed. We didn't play badly, but definitely wasn't a great game.

Yesterday game, as always, had nothing to do with rotation, it had to do with tactics, decissions of players, and all the dozens of factors that make football so impredictible. No making changes in the starting eleven is just an option. If he decides making 3, is just another option.

I've read here that Fulham at home should be beaten easily and now braga man come here saying repeating the same team was fundamental. Oh dear.

by **account deleted by request** » Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:40 pm

Now now girls, no bickering about who's prettier

by **bigmick** » Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:17 pm

Did keeping exactly the same team make any difference to the performance against Fulham? Probably not in reality. I actually slightly disagree with Sabre's reading of the performance in that I think we played a good bit better than he does, but it wasn't because of lack of rotation in my opinion. It didn't help us, it didn't hinder us in this one match. If Torres had have played instead of eigther Crouch or Voronin, would it have made us a stronger team if the Spaniard was fit? Of course as he's a better player and posesses a couple of attributes which neither of them have.

All that said, it would be a fact (assuming you agree that we played pretty well here and against Chelsea at Home), that in our two non-rotated games we have played pretty well.

To make the claim though that if you don't rotate for one game, in isolation, that it makes a huge difference would hugely contradict where I've been coming from all along and I'm not about to do that. What I've been saying from day one is that it's about building momentum, cohesion, rhythm so you get to the point where the team looks like a team, the parts of it all fit together and you go into games expecting to win them.

You don't do it one game, nor two, but over five, six, seven matches at a time. That's not to say you have to play EXACTLY the same team for seven matches on the spin (although lets not forget you are allowed to do that if nobody gets injured or loses form), but it is to say that you play LARGELY the same team for that period.

If you do, your teams develops it's own rhythm. Most everyone who watched the game yesterday will have noticed that our team was playing a good few notches lower in tempo (particularly in the first half) than in the European game. Good teams have natural rhythm. They find it, arrive at it through playing in a style which represents how they play the game, through consistency of selection and method. Good teams have a way of influencing the tempo, so you end up playing at a pace which is within their comfort zone, in a way which they play every week and in so doing they move the battle onto their home ground. Notice when you play Man UTd that the game is frenetic, 100 miles an hour stuff but within that framework they are able to find precision, quality and cutting edge and more often than not come out on top. Arsenal, in their fluid yet staccato rhythm make the game seem bittier as they keep the ball for long periods, pulling you out of shape. As fatigue sets in it gets harder for you yourselves to keep it as passes and miscontrols give the ball back. You'd want to get in tehir faces but it isn't easy, as they hve the rhythm and therefore control the tempo. The Italian teams SLOOOOOW the whole thing down so even teams like Man Utd get drawn into a chess game and aren't very good at it. All teams play better in their own rhythm, their own tempo but first you have to find it. If that self same team we played on Saturday was played over and over, it would find it's rhythm over a period of matches and it would become better for it.

I could go on about rotation all day (and I do on occasions

) but its such a complex subject that it warrants it if your really interested in our club. You can cover up your ears and go for the "well rafa knows more than you lot" if you like and you'll get no argument from me, he does. On this subject though, he has been very wrong in the past and the football club has suffered as a direct result of his misjudgement.

Did non-rotation make us win the game? No. Would we have played better if we had just picked a selection of players making six or seven changes? Who knows? Would we become more consistent, would we win more points if we stuck with a largely settled team? Well I think we would. I think it's an absolute no-brainer. You want consistency but you want to play diffeent players in different positions throughout half the team in every game? Not for me, sorry.

by **Sabre** » Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:39 pm

S@int: You are right. I never insult first, so I consider the score even. However, if Bamaga wants to talk about my head, or about his sunglasses, we can do it in private, without bothering all the forum. You're right in your comment.

Bigmick, your post is fair enough. I like discussing with you about any football thing, and rotation is no exception. As long as it's in this thread and not others (I'm guilty of that) nobody should complain about you and I or whoever talking about it. If it's boring, click another great thread.

Your post is fair enough. You've made numerous times the claim that you are not saying to play the same starting eleven every time, that's clear enough, don't worry. I won't use the Rafa knows better arguement, we come here to discuss football. I'll only say such a thing when someone insults Rafa, you never do that, so I'll never tell you that.

You say that things have an effect after some weeks, which is true. I cannot say you're wrong when you say that if we had rotated less we'd be more fluent. I simply don't know. I'm simply not sure as you are that the impact of rotation have been that harmful for us. Yesterday for instance, good football or not, was a goal-less game until Torres changed the game. So what was the difference between yesterday and other seasons that we ended games like that in which we dominated, with a draw? rotation? or the lack of a striker like Torres, the lack of a player who can change games? I think the latter is a good possibility.

I don't think that Rafa has changed his mind. I think that he won't change the policy, it just happened that yesterday his plans and the "antirotation" people's matched. He'll do changes again, I'd be surprised if he admitted he has changed the policy.

If he does, I'd love to check what happens at the end. And I hope I'm wrong, because that will mean that the team is doing better and winning even more. I wish he'd try it so we dispel some doubts. If not rotating it turns out to happen that games we dominate are always finnished, and chances that are failed by inches, are scored, then I'll be the first one to be happy, because we'll be winning. And I'll eat the humble pie happily aswell.

by **stmichael** » Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:24 pm

Best thing to happen would be for Rafa to win the league title this season or next and then it will not only ram all the anti-rotation :censored:

down peoples throats but also end the debate once and for all and we'll hopefully never have to endure hearing the word again because it well and truly does my head in.

We never heard nothing about it during our first 6 games of the season when we won 5 and drew one and Rafa was ROTATING as much then as he is now.Soon as we drew at Pompey out it comes and off we go again about it all being down to rotation blah blah blah.

Its funny that we had 2 wins against Reading and Wigan after Rafa making EIGHT changes to the team for each match and yet that gets conveniently over-looked. Shouldn't making EIGHT changes to a team completely balls it up and we should be losing 4-0 or something if you listen to the experts??..hmmm.

It doesn't matter whether you pick the same 11 each week or make 5 changes per game, if the 11 that do play don't perform or make individual errors then we hamper our chances of winning. Rafa only made 1 change for the Spurs game from the previous league game and yet rotation was blamed for that draw...Was it not 2 individual errors by our players gifting Spurs 2 goals??. Yes,i think so.

We could go on a 10 game winning streak from tomorrow onwards and NO ONE will mention rotation despite Rafa making 5 changes per game.Then we could lose the 11th game or worst still draw it (As draws seem to cause mass hysteria nowadays with our fans)and Rafa will get stick galore for ROTATING.

Rotation is not the reason we don't win games and never has been but as with the scenario i've just put up, it will get brought up boringly each time we don't win a game. I was pleased to see an unchanged team yesterday but that wasn't the reason we won the game. We won the game mainly due to a bit of individual brilliance from Torres.

by **bigmick** » Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:31 pm

I like to read your posts on this particular subject (or indeed any other as well Sabes) and like you say, it's OK that we disagree. A couple of examples of what I have meant in the past by cohesion and anticipation being important would be Torres's wonderfully inventive little backheel yesterday on the edge of the box. He looked like he was stretching to reach the ball and then he created a little shooting opportunity. Only trouble was of course that nobody read it and the thing was hoofed away. On such little moments as this, more important games will be decided.

Simple lack of anticipation or unfamiliarity? Would the players have more or less chance of reading such flicks, heels and dummies if they played together more often?

If in doubt, once he's fit again watch the initially much-maligned Rooney partnership with Tevez. It's all step overs, dummies, flicks, anticipation, one taking up the space the other has created etc etc and it's an absolute nightmare to defend against. When it's being crossed from the left, watch Ronney and/or Tevez track towards the ball to make a hole for Ronaldo, or when Scholes is arriving into the box how the strikers split to make a landing pad for him, taking markers away. Watch how when Fabregas does it for Arsenal, Adebayor tacks out of the way, or Drogba for Chelsea when Lampard bombs on. How many times this season has Gerrard arrived in the box like a wardrobe down a flight of stairs only to find one of the strikers taking it off his shooting foot, or one of their markers moving in from two yards away to get a block in?

Tiny things decide football matches. Crouch supporters (me amongst them) will have been pleased with his performance yesterday but disappointed he didn't help himself to a goal from Torres's saved shot (nothing to do with rotation that one, just bad play). But if you play together ofen, you beging to read what your teammates might do which has got to help. We all now know when Benayoun tracks to the left wing and we run towards him with the ball, slip it to him and he has it in his locker to bend it into the opposite top corner. Had babel moved it to him a fraction earlier yesterday, the keeper wouldn't have got his feep so well set and the Israeli would probably have scored a great goal. i think we all agree tiny things decide football matches, so all I've ever said is to select the team in way which gives you the best chance of getting those miniscule details right.

Liverpool FC Forum

The rotation thread - All "R" talk in here please!

Who is online