Liverpool FC Forum

[Benny The Noon]

It's good buying players for the future like Hughes but we need players for the now. Established players.

And if your looking at Southampton then I would prefer to look at Lallana and Wanyama

And I think Morrison is this years Cleverly - another youngster who scores a good goal and does well but then gets over hyped.

That comment proves you've either never seen Morrison play, or don't have a clue about football.

Which one is it?

What that comment proves is I have formed my own opinion of him after watching him a few times.

His hype will die down soon enough. Same with all the other English Youngsters that get over hyped - Townsend is another. They are decent enough but that's it IMO

[Benny The Noon]

Unfortunately I don't think it was complete rubbish and had valid points.

The system against Newcastle was our undoing, the same system which we used against Palace and getting analysed in the article.

The 3 cb's leave us a man short elsewhere on the pitch, notably in midfield where our options and lack of movement becomes a disadvantage because the extra player is at the back - that's why we couldn't control the game. It wasn't until Sahko came off and we reverted to 4 at the back for Alberto, when we finally started to press them back and dominate proceedings. Prior to this, the whole system played into Newcastle's hands, hindered us hence why we never got going - nothing clicked. Even with Coutinho in for the ineffective Moses we'd still be a numerical player short in the midfield and this would increase the opponents advantage to close us down better and make us huff and puff our way through attacks.

Rodgers needs to go to four at the back, still allowing the fullbacks to bomb on, with the extra man back in midfield to give us more options and to make it harder for teams to close us down.

4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 would be the better formations to go with and I think Rodgers will change this for WBA, or at least he should do.

No team has won anything significant playing 3 at the back with wingbacks in the Prem. I don't think it will work for us long term and hope we revert to the 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 formation. I think BR went to 3 at the back because when he bought Sahko the form of Skrtel was good and couldn't drop him so found a way to fit the players. 

You have it spot IMO in terms of numbers in the middle of the park

[jacdaniel]

Rodgers has asked suarez and sturridge to stay high up the pitch.
The defence has to sit deep to accomodate Skrtel in particular. 
Moses is not a number 10. 

Those 3 issues are the problem with our midfield.  Defenders are too deep, strikers stay forward so the midfield has far too much ground to cover and Moses is not the best at linking midfield and attack.

[parchpea]

We need that extra man at the back to cover the midfields frailties and I think that's why we are playing it. Teams are running past
Gerrard, Hendo and Lucas and right in on our back 2 so we need the extra body.

Evans did this when we had an ageing and slow Barnes and showpieces like Redknapp in midfield and that's what we are doing here.

Its a short term solution until we find the midfield players we need to go back to the system Rodgers really wants us to play, and there
is also an old way of thinking of loading teams with your best 11 and making it work from there which could be in force here as well.

[damjan193]

Unfortunately I don't think it was complete rubbish and had valid points.

The system against Newcastle was our undoing, the same system which we used against Palace and getting analysed in the article.

The 3 cb's leave us a man short elsewhere on the pitch, notably in midfield where our options and lack of movement becomes a disadvantage because the extra player is at the back - that's why we couldn't control the game. It wasn't until Sahko came off and we reverted to 4 at the back for Alberto, when we finally started to press them back and dominate proceedings. Prior to this, the whole system played into Newcastle's hands, hindered us hence why we never got going - nothing clicked. Even with Coutinho in for the ineffective Moses we'd still be a numerical player short in the midfield and this would increase the opponents advantage to close us down better and make us huff and puff our way through attacks.

Rodgers needs to go to four at the back, still allowing the fullbacks to bomb on, with the extra man back in midfield to give us more options and to make it harder for teams to close us down.

4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 would be the better formations to go with and I think Rodgers will change this for WBA, or at least he should do.

No team has won anything significant playing 3 at the back with wingbacks in the Prem. I don't think it will work for us long term and hope we revert to the 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 formation. I think BR went to 3 at the back because when he bought Sahko the form of Skrtel was good and couldn't drop him so found a way to fit the players. 

You have it spot IMO in terms of numbers in the middle of the park

But which team with enough quality has actually used the 3-5-2 in the Prem? It might not have been successful in England but in recent times it has been very successful in Italy for example.

I don't really agree about the numbers in midfield. Yes, we might have an extra man in defense, but the ones that should be making the numbers in midfield are the fullbacks. People tend to think that the offensive job of a modern fullback is just to bomb forward and be the extra man in the final third, but it isn't or it shouldn't be, especially if you want to play a 3-5-2. Their job is to support the midfield as well. That might sound like it's asking too much from the fullbacks but that's why it's a job for your most energetic and fittest players. Just look at Juventus. They have Lichsteiner at RWB, who's energy is second to none (in the world) and does a great job in all areas on the pitch, while at LWB they have Asamoah, a former midfielder who is also very energetic and significantly helps the midfield both in quantity and quality. This is why I thought Hendo would do a good job for us as RWB but it didn't work out. Our fullbacks on the other hand, tend to constantly bomb forward even when the circumstances don't allow it, which ends in him running into blind alleys (Johnson), or unnecessary waste possession by hoofing it forward when he could have just made a simple pass (Enrique). Also, both of them don't have enough energy to play in that role and do 3 jobs IMO. Definitely not Johnson at least.

The 3-5-2 is a very good formation, especially for the way that we want to play, but at the moment we're just not using it as we should.

[Kenny Kan]

But which team with enough quality has actually used the 3-5-2 in the Prem? It might not have been successful in England but in recent times it has been very successful in Italy for example.

I don't really agree about the numbers in midfield. Yes, we might have an extra man in defense, but the ones that should be making the numbers in midfield are the fullbacks. People tend to think that the offensive job of a modern fullback is just to bomb forward and be the extra man in the final third, but it isn't or it shouldn't be, especially if you want to play a 3-5-2. Their job is to support the midfield as well. That might sound like it's asking too much from the fullbacks but that's why it's a job for your most energetic and fittest players. Just look at Juventus. They have Lichsteiner at RWB, who's energy is second to none (in the world) and does a great job in all areas on the pitch, while at LWB they have Asamoah, a former midfielder who is also very energetic and significantly helps the midfield both in quantity and quality. This is why I thought Hendo would do a good job for us as RWB but it didn't work out. Our fullbacks on the other hand, tend to constantly bomb forward even when the circumstances don't allow it, which ends in him running into blind alleys (Johnson), or unnecessary waste possession by hoofing it forward when he could have just made a simple pass (Enrique). Also, both of them don't have enough energy to play in that role and do 3 jobs IMO. Definitely not Johnson at least.

The 3-5-2 is a very good formation, especially for the way that we want to play, but at the moment we're just not using it as we should. 

When you play 3-5-2 you essentially ask you wing backs to play as wingers, i.e. they are the focal point of the flanks. Neither, Enrique or Cissoko are up to this, and even Johnson looked lost out there. "Fullbacks", double up and overlap which is what Enrique and Johnson do best. Making them become the lone attacking winger sees them pretty much lost, Cissoko was awful going forward and Johnson didn't fare any better.

Another reason why we should revert to a back for with our fullbacks pushing on and supporting midfielders in wider areas, not leaving them the job they are incapable of, to do it alone.

[woof woof !]

Cissoko was awful going forward and Johnson didn't fare any better.

Agree on Cissokho KK but thought Johnson did ok, broke into the box twice and got shots away that on another day we've seen him stick away.

Not that I'm totally sold on 3-5-2 but maybe the problem is not the formation but the personnel that are being asked to play it ?

[Ben Patrick]

I've tried to post a reply twice in this thread today and they haven't saved ?

Third time lucky hopefully.

I agree with Kenny on the system not working.
We have played it now for 3 games and not looked particulaly good in any of them.
Sunderland were the better side for long periods and we hit them on the break due to us having 2 great forwards.
Palace at home you would expect to win even if we played a 2-2-6 formation. But i dont think we played very well in the game despite the win.
Then Newcastle, they were the better side also for most of the game and had 10 men for over half of it.
It wasnt until he took Sakho off and changed to a four when we started looking more of a threat.
We effectively have 3 centre halves marking one striker as most sides play just the one up top.
We are then being overrun in midfield as that's where the extra body is.
We played Southampton last season away and he played just 2 in midfield then and we were comfortably beaten. We did it again at home to Spurs and where losing and being dominated until he brought Henderson on and added to the two in the middle.
We have gotten away with it in these 3 games due to the fact that Suarez and Sturridge can get goals from nothing. But it shouldnt hide from the fact that we have not been performing at all well.

[Fowler_E7]

I think the formation would work well when Couthino is in the team, but without him I don’t see the point as we don’t have anyone suitable to play the number 10 role.

[damjan193]

But which team with enough quality has actually used the 3-5-2 in the Prem? It might not have been successful in England but in recent times it has been very successful in Italy for example.

I don't really agree about the numbers in midfield. Yes, we might have an extra man in defense, but the ones that should be making the numbers in midfield are the fullbacks. People tend to think that the offensive job of a modern fullback is just to bomb forward and be the extra man in the final third, but it isn't or it shouldn't be, especially if you want to play a 3-5-2. Their job is to support the midfield as well. That might sound like it's asking too much from the fullbacks but that's why it's a job for your most energetic and fittest players. Just look at Juventus. They have Lichsteiner at RWB, who's energy is second to none (in the world) and does a great job in all areas on the pitch, while at LWB they have Asamoah, a former midfielder who is also very energetic and significantly helps the midfield both in quantity and quality. This is why I thought Hendo would do a good job for us as RWB but it didn't work out. Our fullbacks on the other hand, tend to constantly bomb forward even when the circumstances don't allow it, which ends in him running into blind alleys (Johnson), or unnecessary waste possession by hoofing it forward when he could have just made a simple pass (Enrique). Also, both of them don't have enough energy to play in that role and do 3 jobs IMO. Definitely not Johnson at least.

The 3-5-2 is a very good formation, especially for the way that we want to play, but at the moment we're just not using it as we should. 

When you play 3-5-2 you essentially ask you wing backs to play as wingers, i.e. they are the focal point of the flanks. Neither, Enrique or Cissoko are up to this, and even Johnson looked lost out there. "Fullbacks", double up and overlap which is what Enrique and Johnson do best. Making them become the lone attacking winger sees them pretty much lost, Cissoko was awful going forward and Johnson didn't fare any better.

Another reason why we should revert to a back for with our fullbacks pushing on and supporting midfielders in wider areas, not leaving them the job they are incapable of, to do it alone.

I very much agree with this and it was what I was trying to say more or less. The fullbacks and their qualities are essential for this formation IMO. But I had to disagree with you on suggesting that 3-5-2 is a formation that has the midfield low in numbers. It is a very good formation but we aren't using it well.

[stmichael]

I'm pretty sure we'll revert back to four at the back against West Brom at the weekend.

Hopefully Coutinho is back as we desperately miss his creativity from midfield. I like Moses but asking him to play in the hole is just crazy. He doesn't have the vision to do it.

[Stu the Red]

But which team with enough quality has actually used the 3-5-2 in the Prem? It might not have been successful in England but in recent times it has been very successful in Italy for example.

I don't really agree about the numbers in midfield. Yes, we might have an extra man in defense, but the ones that should be making the numbers in midfield are the fullbacks. People tend to think that the offensive job of a modern fullback is just to bomb forward and be the extra man in the final third, but it isn't or it shouldn't be, especially if you want to play a 3-5-2. Their job is to support the midfield as well. That might sound like it's asking too much from the fullbacks but that's why it's a job for your most energetic and fittest players. Just look at Juventus. They have Lichsteiner at RWB, who's energy is second to none (in the world) and does a great job in all areas on the pitch, while at LWB they have Asamoah, a former midfielder who is also very energetic and significantly helps the midfield both in quantity and quality. This is why I thought Hendo would do a good job for us as RWB but it didn't work out. Our fullbacks on the other hand, tend to constantly bomb forward even when the circumstances don't allow it, which ends in him running into blind alleys (Johnson), or unnecessary waste possession by hoofing it forward when he could have just made a simple pass (Enrique). Also, both of them don't have enough energy to play in that role and do 3 jobs IMO. Definitely not Johnson at least.

The 3-5-2 is a very good formation, especially for the way that we want to play, but at the moment we're just not using it as we should. 

When you play 3-5-2 you essentially ask you wing backs to play as wingers, i.e. they are the focal point of the flanks. Neither, Enrique or Cissoko are up to this, and even Johnson looked lost out there. "Fullbacks", double up and overlap which is what Enrique and Johnson do best. Making them become the lone attacking winger sees them pretty much lost, Cissoko was awful going forward and Johnson didn't fare any better.

Another reason why we should revert to a back for with our fullbacks pushing on and supporting midfielders in wider areas, not leaving them the job they are incapable of, to do it alone.

And the player who plays behind the striker is the person to help out the wide players. Thats exactly the point. The player behind the striker is your left and right winger and that is what makes the system work, or allows it to fail. Moses is nowhere near good enough to perform this role, he can't even play on one wing during a game, let alone two.

IF you remember the way McManaman used to play that role? To be fair its unfair to compare McManaman to Moses because McManaman was a quality footballer, Moses isn't.

3-5-2 allows you numbers in midfield, attack and defense used properly. Its a system the Germans, Italians and Brazilians have based their philosophy on for years with slight variations.

Rodgers is using the 3-5-2 because it allows him to play Suarez up front with Sturridge without losing the numbers in midfield.

Anyone who believes the system is to blame for poor performances is mis guided. The players we have in that system aren't good enough.

[Kenny Kan]

Cissoko was awful going forward and Johnson didn't fare any better.

Agree on Cissokho KK but thought Johnson did ok, broke into the box twice and got shots away that on another day we've seen him stick away.

Not that I'm totally sold on 3-5-2 but maybe the problem is not the formation but the personnel that are being asked to play it ?

Oui.

So, instead of changing the personnel we haven't got, we change the system to suit the players' position they are more comfortable and look better with.

[Kenny Kan]

But which team with enough quality has actually used the 3-5-2 in the Prem? It might not have been successful in England but in recent times it has been very successful in Italy for example.

I don't really agree about the numbers in midfield. Yes, we might have an extra man in defense, but the ones that should be making the numbers in midfield are the fullbacks. People tend to think that the offensive job of a modern fullback is just to bomb forward and be the extra man in the final third, but it isn't or it shouldn't be, especially if you want to play a 3-5-2. Their job is to support the midfield as well. That might sound like it's asking too much from the fullbacks but that's why it's a job for your most energetic and fittest players. Just look at Juventus. They have Lichsteiner at RWB, who's energy is second to none (in the world) and does a great job in all areas on the pitch, while at LWB they have Asamoah, a former midfielder who is also very energetic and significantly helps the midfield both in quantity and quality. This is why I thought Hendo would do a good job for us as RWB but it didn't work out. Our fullbacks on the other hand, tend to constantly bomb forward even when the circumstances don't allow it, which ends in him running into blind alleys (Johnson), or unnecessary waste possession by hoofing it forward when he could have just made a simple pass (Enrique). Also, both of them don't have enough energy to play in that role and do 3 jobs IMO. Definitely not Johnson at least.

The 3-5-2 is a very good formation, especially for the way that we want to play, but at the moment we're just not using it as we should. 

When you play 3-5-2 you essentially ask you wing backs to play as wingers, i.e. they are the focal point of the flanks. Neither, Enrique or Cissoko are up to this, and even Johnson looked lost out there. "Fullbacks", double up and overlap which is what Enrique and Johnson do best. Making them become the lone attacking winger sees them pretty much lost, Cissoko was awful going forward and Johnson didn't fare any better.

Another reason why we should revert to a back for with our fullbacks pushing on and supporting midfielders in wider areas, not leaving them the job they are incapable of, to do it alone.

And the player who plays behind the striker is the person to help out the wide players. Thats exactly the point. The player behind the striker is your left and right winger and that is what makes the system work, or allows it to fail. Moses is nowhere near good enough to perform this role, he can't even play on one wing during a game, let alone two.

IF you remember the way McManaman used to play that role? To be fair its unfair to compare McManaman to Moses because McManaman was a quality footballer, Moses isn't.

3-5-2 allows you numbers in midfield, attack and defense used properly. Its a system the Germans, Italians and Brazilians have based their philosophy on for years with slight variations.

Rodgers is using the 3-5-2 because it allows him to play Suarez up front with Sturridge without losing the numbers in midfield.

Anyone who believes the system is to blame for poor performances is mis guided. The players we have in that system aren't good enough.

Whatever the argument you essentially agree that this system doesn't get the best out of our players.

If you draw Moses out wide as you say, you are only left with two in midfield. If Moses was up top flanking Sturridge in a wide position with Enrique pushing on, you'd still have 3 midfielders in and around the middle - with 4 at the back.

That's what having the 3rd cb back does, it takes a man from elsewhere as opposed to having 2 cb's.

[Stu the Red]

Whatever the argument you essentially agree that this system doesn't get the best out of our players.

If you draw Moses out wide as you say, you are only left with two in midfield. If Moses was up top flanking Sturridge in a wide position with Enrique pushing on, you'd still have 3 midfielders in and around the middle - with 4 at the back.

That's what having the 3rd cb back does, it takes a man from elsewhere as opposed to having 2 cb's.

Your full backs act as support to the midfield allowing you to have five across the midfield... hence the reason its a 3-5-2... Its got nothing to do with drawing someone from your own side into a wide area. If anything thats where you need them as an outlet and to hold the ball up.

Two of your centre halfs are supposed to double up as full backs when you have the ball meaning you have only one centre half as apose to two like in the 4-3-3 which Rodgers preferes.

Both systems have there advantages, but 3-5-2 for me is a far better and more complete system and one I understand alot more.

4-3-3 is a better system to apply pressure but the reality is we don't have enough good players and enough athletic players in the side to make this a good way for us to play.

On a different note, I'm not one for talking numbers in terms of systems as I think most (not all) of it is bollox anyway. Its about the players... not weather you line in them up in a 1-2-3-4-5 formation. Different "formations" will appear during a game at different points and no starting formation is totally rigid.

Three in midfield is extremely overated aswell, and is a bit of a fad that has gone round over the last few years. This can be out done by playing down the flanks, drawing two of the midfielders out wide and leaving teams extremely vunerable to a switch of play or a winger who is able to get to the byline. In a few years time the trend will change again to another formation.

The main point is, that you can blame the system all you like, you can have the best system in the world, but if the players aren't good enough, you'll win didly squat.