Author Topic: Defending Set Pieces  (Read 27395 times)

Offline Hazell

  • Ultimate Movie Night Draft Winner 2017. King - or Queen - of Mystery. Hyzenthlay. The 5th Benitle's sex conch.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 76,507
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #160 on: December 27, 2013, 09:00:07 pm »
It's certainly a huge issue, but I also think we need to apply a slightly different slant to it too. The biggest culprits in our set-piece defending are actually Rafa players. This isn't a slight on Rafa (a sainted man), but he was very much into micromanaging the tactics of the game - you can see it in his sideline behaviour as he directs, redirects and repositions players every few minutes. So in effect, when he worked on set-pieces, everyone had a job to do, and they weren't to deviate from it. Clarke is much the same, and you could see his imprint at both Liverpool and West Brom in that sense. Rodgers, though, expects his players to work it out for themselves. In the attack phase, Kenny was the same - he believed the players had to be able to create on their own. So to a degree, there is a form of learned helplessness from some of our players in these situations. It's the one compromise I think Rodgers could make to his methods, with a tip of the hat to Rafa. Set-pieces are the one part of the game you CAN rehearse and micromanage, and we're suffering a little because of the freewheeling nature of how Rodgers sees the game. It makes for a brilliant attack though!

That's the thing. Does Rodgers restrict the time and effort spent working on set pieces for other aspects of our play?* Probably I think and so being better at defending set pieces is something we're currently we're giving up in order to be more successful elsewhere. Given how we're performing overall, then it could be argued he could well be justified. Why oh why can't we have both a perfect defence and attack? We'd have nothing to complain about then :P

*I still presume under Rafa and Kenny, the players were aware of the task they had at corners and more effort was put on that in the training ground as well as during the match than we're currently doing.
We have to change from doubter to believer. Now.

Online Eeyore

  • "I have no problem whatsoever stating that FSG have done a good job.".Mo Money, Mo Problems to invent. Number 1 is Carragher. Number 2 is Carragher. Number 3 is Carragher. Number 4 is Carragher. Likes to play God in his spare time.
  • Campaigns
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 31,566
  • JFT 97
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #161 on: December 27, 2013, 09:04:00 pm »
It's certainly a huge issue, but I also think we need to apply a slightly different slant to it too. The biggest culprits in our set-piece defending are actually Rafa players. This isn't a slight on Rafa (a sainted man), but he was very much into micromanaging the tactics of the game - you can see it in his sideline behaviour as he directs, redirects and repositions players every few minutes. So in effect, when he worked on set-pieces, everyone had a job to do, and they weren't to deviate from it. Clarke is much the same, and you could see his imprint at both Liverpool and West Brom in that sense. Rodgers, though, expects his players to work it out for themselves. In the attack phase, Kenny was the same - he believed the players had to be able to create on their own. So to a degree, there is a form of learned helplessness from some of our players in these situations. It's the one compromise I think Rodgers could make to his methods, with a tip of the hat to Rafa. Set-pieces are the one part of the game you CAN rehearse and micromanage, and we're suffering a little because of the freewheeling nature of how Rodgers sees the game. It makes for a brilliant attack though!

Rafa tended to have a Keeper who would come for crosses and a big centre forward to bring back though add in full backs who tended to be more defensive and I think it is harder for us at the moment. Gerrard at the near post has been a big miss as well. I think if Gerrard is at the near post the ball gets cleared before it gets to Kompany.

I think Rodgers willingness to go for teams away from home is refreshing but does leave us struggling at set pieces. You can hide a couple of aerially weak players but we are starting games with six or seven players who are hopeless in the air.
"Ohhh-kayyy"

Offline rocco

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 37,252
  • ⭐️⭐️⭐️6 Times Baby ⭐️⭐️⭐️
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #162 on: December 27, 2013, 09:04:08 pm »
That's the thing. Does Rodgers restrict the time and effort spent working on set pieces for other aspects of our play?* Probably I think and so being better at defending set pieces is something we're currently we're giving up in order to be more successful elsewhere. Given how we're performing overall, then it could be argued he could well be justified. Why oh why can't we have both a perfect defence and attack? We'd have nothing to complain about then :P

*I still presume under Rafa and Kenny, the players were aware of the task they had at corners and more effort was put on that in the training ground as well as during the match than we're currently doing.
Wondering could a extra hour of training be that hard to add or disrupt the schedule ?

Offline Funky_Gibbons

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,811
  • Follow the gourd
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #163 on: December 27, 2013, 09:16:58 pm »
Rafa tended to have a Keeper who would come for crosses and a big centre forward to bring back though add in full backs who tended to be more defensive and I think it is harder for us at the moment. Gerrard at the near post has been a big miss as well. I think if Gerrard is at the near post the ball gets cleared before it gets to Kompany.

I think Rodgers willingness to go for teams away from home is refreshing but does leave us struggling at set pieces. You can hide a couple of aerially weak players but we are starting games with six or seven players who are hopeless in the air.
But, as I have said before, those players who are considered weak in the air are not the ones failing at set pieces, it is mostly our defenders being caught out and mostly the centre backs. 
"And there are red and white scarves of Liverpool, and red and white bobble hats of Liverpool, and red and white rosettes of Liverpool, and nothing else. And the sun shines now."

Offline tray fenny

  • virtue signaling keyboard warrior
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,724
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #164 on: December 27, 2013, 09:18:49 pm »
We should watch the Germany team defending corners during the recent game v England.  They were excellent, they had 4 or 5 guys in a line attacking the approach of the ball with the first defender in line with the near post. England never looked like even touching the ball.
'Germany are a very difficult team to play, they had 11 internationals out there today.' - Steve Lomas

Offline bepoq

  • a-lu-la!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Anny Roader
  • ******
  • Posts: 496
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #165 on: December 27, 2013, 09:24:34 pm »
Pops very valid view on the corners has been well documented on this site. I suggest you do some homework before you start with the anecdotal evidence (ie what you see on the telly).

look mate, I read a good bit of this site regularly (have done, like you I suppose, for best part of a decade now) and I've read all of his stuff recently, including the corners debate. He continually argues that corners are a low scoring restart "unless you don't defend them at all." On the whole I think that is entirely convincing, but my argument was that "unless you don't defend them at all" might be more usefully described as "unless you don't defend them at all competently" i.e. that the statistical curve might appear a bit like a cliff—they are low scoring until an approximate point of defensive ineptitude, at which time they suddenly become much more threatening when facing a team with good delivery and significant ariel threat.

He didn't seem to feel that that was worth a response beyond condescension and I was in too poor a mood to put up with it. It has nothing to do with "what I see on the telly," (though thanks for your condescension likewise), the point I was making is that the basis, and therefore the significance of the statistic he constantly uses might be misleading in outlier cases—he could have explained why he didn't think it was and ought to hold across the board entirely, but instead he wanted me to play a guessing game with him—a gambit he's been using frequently recently and which I think is a) a pretty condescending mode of discourse and b) (if that's what he was using it for) a fairly wretched form of pedagogy.

"Do my homework..." you cheeky snide.

Online Eeyore

  • "I have no problem whatsoever stating that FSG have done a good job.".Mo Money, Mo Problems to invent. Number 1 is Carragher. Number 2 is Carragher. Number 3 is Carragher. Number 4 is Carragher. Likes to play God in his spare time.
  • Campaigns
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 31,566
  • JFT 97
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #166 on: December 27, 2013, 09:27:30 pm »
But, as I have said before, those players who are considered weak in the air are not the ones failing at set pieces, it is mostly our defenders being caught out and mostly the centre backs. 

I am not sure that is true though, for me Lucas should of stopped the ball getting to Kompany in the first place. If you are a big side then there is a fine line between the opposition hitting a fast flat corner that hits the first man and hitting a higher ball that brings the keeper into play. We don't have that, probably the best example is Caulker running straight across the six yard box with Skrtel hanging off him and no one attacking the ball the other week.
"Ohhh-kayyy"

Online redtel

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,284
  • Sir Roger-Scored first goal ever on MOTD.
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #167 on: December 27, 2013, 09:32:39 pm »
It's certainly a huge issue, but I also think we need to apply a slightly different slant to it too. The biggest culprits in our set-piece defending are actually Rafa players. This isn't a slight on Rafa (a sainted man), but he was very much into micromanaging the tactics of the game - you can see it in his sideline behaviour as he directs, redirects and repositions players every few minutes. So in effect, when he worked on set-pieces, everyone had a job to do, and they weren't to deviate from it. Clarke is much the same, and you could see his imprint at both Liverpool and West Brom in that sense. Rodgers, though, expects his players to work it out for themselves. In the attack phase, Kenny was the same - he believed the players had to be able to create on their own. So to a degree, there is a form of learned helplessness from some of our players in these situations. It's the one compromise I think Rodgers could make to his methods, with a tip of the hat to Rafa. Set-pieces are the one part of the game you CAN rehearse and micromanage, and we're suffering a little because of the freewheeling nature of how Rodgers sees the game. It makes for a brilliant attack though!

Learned helplessness. It's there for all to see in several of our defenders. Thanks for that POP.

Quite depresses me though. We hire Peters to assist and facilitate in how they deal with the mental side of playing at the top level yet leave them to figure out themselves how to improve aspects of defending which they are struggling with. We see the same mistakes happening over and over.

Rafa did and still does micromanage but if the aim is to win matches then we need to find some middle ground to come to the aid of players who cannot achieve the level of defending we need. Surely we are not talking about such a large chunk of training time that it would stop us developing attacking ideas?

We are definitely believers and we’ve won the fucking lot!

Offline Funky_Gibbons

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,811
  • Follow the gourd
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #168 on: December 27, 2013, 09:42:22 pm »
I am not sure that is true though, for me Lucas should of stopped the ball getting to Kompany in the first place. If you are a big side then there is a fine line between the opposition hitting a fast flat corner that hits the first man and hitting a higher ball that brings the keeper into play. We don't have that, probably the best example is Caulker running straight across the six yard box with Skrtel hanging off him and no one attacking the ball the other week.
OK perhaps we could do better at defending the ball earlier but is our rate of conceding from set-pieces and specifically corners any worse without Gerrard in the team defending the front post area?

For me the same players are being mentioned after every game for trying to use the black arts of defending rather than concentrating on trying to win the header. It seems the opposition is also targeting specific players as they can sense he is liable to gibe away a free header or penalty at any moment. 
"And there are red and white scarves of Liverpool, and red and white bobble hats of Liverpool, and red and white rosettes of Liverpool, and nothing else. And the sun shines now."

Offline Not A Scouser

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 498
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #169 on: December 27, 2013, 09:44:19 pm »
I watch Skrtel compete for the ball in the air from opposition goalkicks and there's no wrestling, no fighting for position.  He sees the ball and goes and gets it, and he does it very well.  I watch Skrtel on free kicks and corners and he plays completely differently, concentrating on his man more than the ball and wrestling for position.

I watch Sakho when attacking corners and he is very effective at getting to the ball.  At the other end he seems often anonymous (not necessarily bad for a defender).

I know that the situations are different in all sorts of ways, position on the pitch, direction of the ball, space and opponent, but it does seem to me that when the instruction is "see the ball and go get it" they perform better than "don't let this guy score."

The opposite is true for Mignolet.

Perhaps zonal marking would suit personalities better?

Offline kavah

  • the Blacksmith. Definitely NOT from Blackpool!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 19,662
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #170 on: December 27, 2013, 09:46:34 pm »
Get Suarez to win the header.

Offline PhaseOfPlay

  • Well red.Tom Jones Lover. AKA Debbie McGee. Apparently.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 28,289
  • Under 7s Coaching Manual Owner.
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #171 on: December 27, 2013, 09:54:27 pm »
look mate, I read a good bit of this site regularly (have done, like you I suppose, for best part of a decade now) and I've read all of his stuff recently, including the corners debate. He continually argues that corners are a low scoring restart "unless you don't defend them at all." On the whole I think that is entirely convincing, but my argument was that "unless you don't defend them at all" might be more usefully described as "unless you don't defend them at all competently" i.e. that the statistical curve might appear a bit like a cliff—they are low scoring until an approximate point of defensive ineptitude, at which time they suddenly become much more threatening when facing a team with good delivery and significant ariel threat.

He didn't seem to feel that that was worth a response beyond condescension and I was in too poor a mood to put up with it. It has nothing to do with "what I see on the telly," (though thanks for your condescension likewise), the point I was making is that the basis, and therefore the significance of the statistic he constantly uses might be misleading in outlier cases—he could have explained why he didn't think it was and ought to hold across the board entirely, but instead he wanted me to play a guessing game with him—a gambit he's been using frequently recently and which I think is a) a pretty condescending mode of discourse and b) (if that's what he was using it for) a fairly wretched form of pedagogy.

"Do my homework..." you cheeky snide.

By asking questions, I was actually attempting to guide you towards the answer yourself, as with most cases people generally tend to have the answer already, but never really thought deeply enough about it to know what it was - even though they had the answer all the time. It's amazing how much knowledge of the game people have if they dispensed with some of the myths of the game, and approached the game with an open mind. As with players, it's very often better to get players to coach themselves rather than just give them the answers. They often know exactly what is required, even if they didn't think about it before. Same with supporters. There are some truths to the game, and some myths. People tend to believe the myths zealously though. I prefer to address the realities. Teach a man to fish, and all that.

The reason I asked you questions (although despite how it might come across, I never do so intentionally condescendingly - but you certainly wouldn't want to be a player for me, because you'd spend a lot of time negatively reacting to being guided to the answers, it seems) is because you wanted to take the topic down the route of statistics, but the answer wasn't statistical, as I showed later - it was technical, in terms of angles, types of delivery, laws of the game, and numerical overloads as well as some tactical considerations. Statistics weren't going to come into it until those areas were addressed.

If you don't like how I approached discussing things with you, though, then clearly we don't need to have any discourse with each other.
Better looking than Samie.

Offline bepoq

  • a-lu-la!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Anny Roader
  • ******
  • Posts: 496
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #172 on: December 27, 2013, 10:03:34 pm »

Call me patronising/condescending all you want, but this bit is the red flag. It's likes saying "you say that plane crashes are actually statistically rare events, but I don't buy it - I saw a plane crash on the news yesterday, so I'm not flying anymore because flying clearly isn't safe". It's just ignores the facts and realities of the situation. If you want to do that, fine. But don't try to then put forward arguments that then fly in the face of the reality. You don't get to twist the way the game plays out to suit your own view.



aye, except your analogy is weak, as it isn't anything like that. I didn't say, we conceded yesterday from a set piece yesterday so that statistic must be wrong (which would be the equivalent), I said that within a broad statistic such as that (even an accurate one) many things are going on, and perhaps if a team is a statistical outlier within that broadly accurate statistic, judging how one should proceed by the broad statistic becomes misleading.

In any case, I'm not at all sure what that one opening phrase, even if a red flag to you, has to do with your ignoring the rest of the post and asking me to play guessing games. I mean look mate—I value and frequently learn a lot from your posts, but I'm fast moving toward never responding to them either positively or negatively because I don't come on here to get condescended to—I'm in academia and there's plenty of that at work.


Phase of Play is a highly experienced coach who shares his insights here. He's not being patronising, he's doing what all good educators do - asking us to think for ourselves.

The internet is full of opinions masquerading as The Truth. PoP honours us by challenging our prejudices and preconceptions from a position of knowledge and experience. I for one, really appreciate his insights, as I am woefully ignorant of football philosophy. This forum benefits from his excellent posts, however infuriating one finds the question being asked - and trying to find the post wherein the answer may be addressed!

christ mate, seriously, he honours us? You think that's what he's looking for here? I think he's excellent generally—top writing filled with insight about the working and current understanding of the game, and I very much like it that he writes on here. But seriously, ignoring the pith of a considered post (that was questioning as much as stating) and pulling the guessing game lark on people, esp. after a difficult loss? Hardly the Socratic method is it? Look, I freely admit POP knows a good deal more about football than I do in general and a shocking amount more about the way it is currently understood, but experts and educators both get caught up in the structures of current understanding and theory and the rhetoric and narrative that forms the current state of their discipline too, and they make mistakes and go down blind alleys too, frequently, and the good ones attempt to guard against this by considering and valuing critically engaged questions and they don't get condescending with their answers—particularly if they're also trying to educate.  More to the point, it's a forum—I'm glad to learn things from POP, but he's not my sensei, and as I said, I don't come on here to get patronised.

and now I've made my point and will shut it—no hard feelings POP, I was in a wretched sodding mood last night—much better now.

Offline bepoq

  • a-lu-la!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Anny Roader
  • ******
  • Posts: 496
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #173 on: December 27, 2013, 10:27:21 pm »
By asking questions, I was actually attempting to guide you towards the answer yourself, as with most cases people generally tend to have the answer already, but never really thought deeply enough about it to know what it was - even though they had the answer all the time. It's amazing how much knowledge of the game people have if they dispensed with some of the myths of the game, and approached the game with an open mind. As with players, it's very often better to get players to coach themselves rather than just give them the answers. They often know exactly what is required, even if they didn't think about it before. Same with supporters. There are some truths to the game, and some myths. People tend to believe the myths zealously though. I prefer to address the realities. Teach a man to fish, and all that.

The reason I asked you questions (although despite how it might come across, I never do so intentionally condescendingly - but you certainly wouldn't want to be a player for me, because you'd spend a lot of time negatively reacting to being guided to the answers, it seems) is because you wanted to take the topic down the route of statistics, but the answer wasn't statistical, as I showed later - it was technical, in terms of angles, types of delivery, laws of the game, and numerical overloads as well as some tactical considerations. Statistics weren't going to come into it until those areas were addressed.

If you don't like how I approached discussing things with you, though, then clearly we don't need to have any discourse with each other.

alright, one more, as this was addressed directly to me. that wasn't what I said though mate—I'm glad to be guided, generally speaking, by people who I acknowledge to be better informed/experienced about things, among which I include you, it happens a lot in Aikido, which I do but am shite at, Scottish trad music (I'm really an Irish muso) etc.. So I'm pretty happy with it generally speaking—no bother. but you ignored everything that I said in that post after your "red flag" evidently assuming it must all be rubbish, before you began with the  guiding and used "would you like to guess" [...my child] as your way forward. Actually, I don't usually mind your stuff, as I've said a number of times now. But if you're going to get on your high horse about it (oh, you didn't like the way I said something? you should be honoured to get it, so I'll just suggest we shouldn't talk any more from my position of relative power in the conversation) I'm just not sure why, but have it your way. And no again—you've made a big assumption there again—I've always liked coaches like that, and I also try to do it with my own students (music)—doesn't mean I don't get it badly wrong here and there—me, I try to notice when I have misjudged it and pissed somebody off more than necessary, and acknowledge it, rather than getting defensive (having said that, I've gotten that pretty wrong in the past too).

My point—which I was really originally hoping to hear your opinion on (and still am)–possibly also why I was pissed off about it, and has probably been largely looked now at if not addressed directly, is on the "corners are not that much of a threat" stat. I mean if, say, you take all of Al's recent points about physicality, and yours about Rafa's players and coaching, and maybe some just plain old ineptitude mixed in, or lack of work on it, or whatever, is there a plunging point on the graph of the "they aren't that much of threat" statistic, where suddenly a team is below some threshold that makes them a big threat?—regularly yielding goals directly or contributing to the ratcheting up of pressure. I'm not suggesting you have that graph, but figure you've the most comprehensive experience to consider whether it is likely or not and say why it isn't if it isn't.

Offline conman

  • Ohh aaaah just a little bit, Ooh aahh, a little bit more. Aerial stalker perv. Not cool enough to get the lolz.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 27,498
    • Cocopoppyhead
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #174 on: December 28, 2013, 12:09:10 am »
It's amazing that nearly every one of those goals conceded from a set piece has been a defender making a mistake. With Rodgers preferring the smaller, technical player there was allays a danger we would be weaker at set pieces but more often than not it is our strapping defenders who are being out muscled or out manoeuvred.
it's more than that Gibbo, I mentioned Skrtel's starting position is very poor in the round table, which means he will always be 2nd to the ball and thus relies on jersey pulling and hoping to merely put the attacker off, rather than take control of the situation and attack the ball himself. Skrtel should be lining up (mostly) with his back to the goal, standing open and using his peripheral vision to see both man and ball.

So you can say that it's his individual mistake(s) that leads to the goal, but these mistakes happen as he is not defending correctly. I'm using Martin as an example, not singling him out as the sole culprit.

Offline conman

  • Ohh aaaah just a little bit, Ooh aahh, a little bit more. Aerial stalker perv. Not cool enough to get the lolz.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 27,498
    • Cocopoppyhead
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #175 on: December 28, 2013, 12:12:25 am »

Also Mignolet could help take some of the pressure off by leaving his line.  But he's rooted to it unfortunately.
Indeed, Mignolet is possibly the best 6 yard box goalkeeper in the premier league, probably one of the worst outside of it. :/

Offline conman

  • Ohh aaaah just a little bit, Ooh aahh, a little bit more. Aerial stalker perv. Not cool enough to get the lolz.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 27,498
    • Cocopoppyhead
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #176 on: December 28, 2013, 12:19:16 am »

Anyway, according to Whoscored.com, every team has played 18 matches. A total of 479 goals have been scored, of which 113 have come from set pieces, which means that 23.6% of all goals scored have come from set pieces (not including penalties and OGs which may have resulted indirectly from set pieces).

it would be better to calculate the percentage of goals conceded from set pieces for all teams (minus liverpool), then compare directly to liverpool. Rather than comparing to all teams vs one of those teams included in the list.

Edit: Great post though, Ta for taking the time to research it
« Last Edit: December 28, 2013, 12:31:38 am by conman »

Offline conman

  • Ohh aaaah just a little bit, Ooh aahh, a little bit more. Aerial stalker perv. Not cool enough to get the lolz.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 27,498
    • Cocopoppyhead
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #177 on: December 28, 2013, 12:24:37 am »
Not a bad idea at all. They might get one goal or shot off. But the one they miss and see us rampaging at their 2 fullbacks sitting back with our 4-5 attackers will make teams stop putting numbers in the box, which makes a clearer area for Mignolet to claim the ball.
I don't have too much confidence in Mignolet claiming a cross outside his 6 yard line. If Reina was in goal, the strategy would fit like a glove (pardon the pun) due to his distribution and willingness to command the box.

Offline jdpapa3

  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 788
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #178 on: December 28, 2013, 01:14:39 am »
Wondering could a extra hour of training be that hard to add or disrupt the schedule ?

I mean, who's to say that we're not doing that already and Rodgers has us close to our maximum potential at defending set pieces?  I certainly doubt that is true, but it's possible that the whole thing could click at a certain point in the season just like our possession dominance/pressing has.

I wish there were better stats available to the public, team-wise. Yes, you can calculate our numbers, but it takes a while and to then do it for the remaining 19 makes it a bear of a project. You'd be looking at goals per corner and goals per set piece. Can also get murky because set pieces in the attacking half can be widely different as far as goal expectation. I do wonder if our goals per corner is in line with the league average? It's not the amount conceded per team because we probably concede far less than the average team due to our top 5 possession.

Offline Fromola

  • For the love of god please shut the fuck up. Lomola... “The sky is falling and I’m off to tell the King!...” Places stock in the wrong opinions. Miserable F*cker! Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to tide us over this season
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 30,621
  • Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #179 on: December 28, 2013, 08:59:00 am »
Interesting. Do you think we should look to hire a Clarke-like coach?

I think we need a defensively minded coach to balance our much improved attacking qualities. Steve Clarke had the defence well drilled. Johnson and Enrique were pretty solid. Skrtel and Agger when paired together were very good. Skrtel was our player of the year in Kenny's full season.
Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to tide us over this season

Offline Redman0151

  • Stills and Nash Warloch
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,967
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #180 on: December 28, 2013, 09:17:28 am »
Just seen this stat:

Skrtel's fault in Kompany's goal means he's now been directly at fault for 5 aerial goals, one every 284.2mins, the worst of any LFC CB.

putting that into context, nearly 25% of our goals conceded this season has came directly from Skrtel getting best in the air

Honestly it's not good enough, and the myth that Skrtel is 'a Hardman who eats nails for breakfast' needs to go away, I just can't comprehend why he's starting every game ahead of Toure or Agger
« Last Edit: December 28, 2013, 09:52:01 am by Crosby Wych »
"I would say we certainly have the resources to compete with anybody in football." Tom Werner 12/04/2012

Offline robgomm

  • He just can't get enough of Luis Suarez.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 10,087
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #181 on: December 28, 2013, 09:20:01 am »
I think we need a defensively minded coach to balance our much improved attacking qualities. Steve Clarke had the defence well drilled. Johnson and Enrique were pretty solid. Skrtel and Agger when paired together were very good. Skrtel was our player of the year in Kenny's full season.

But the game isn't attack/defence. The things Clarke does to organise the defence require the whole team to be organised differently.

Offline moloch

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,294
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #182 on: December 28, 2013, 09:29:11 am »
Honestly it's not good enough, and the myth that Skrtel is 'a Hardman who eats nails for breakfast' needs to go away, I just can't comprehend why he's starting every game ahead of Toure or Agger

I'm not sure anyone who has watched Skrtel lately thinks that way anymore. I still think his big decline in aerial ability happened after banging heads with Carra a few seasons ago. Probably a bs thinking, but there you go..


Offline Funky_Gibbons

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,811
  • Follow the gourd
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #183 on: December 28, 2013, 09:48:54 am »
Just seen this stat:

Skrtel's fault in Kompany's goal means he's now been directly at fault for 5 aerial goals, one every 284.2mins, the worst of any LFC CB.

Honestly it's not good enough, and the myth that Skrtel is 'a Hardman who eats nails for breakfast' needs to go away, I just can't comprehend why he's starting every game ahead of Toure or Agger
It's odd that Skrtel was one of the players called out by the manager after the Oldham defeat last season for not being physical enough and pretty much didn't play again that season yet this season he has got back into the team and is seemingly still struggling physically against opponents. 
"And there are red and white scarves of Liverpool, and red and white bobble hats of Liverpool, and red and white rosettes of Liverpool, and nothing else. And the sun shines now."

Offline Twelfth Man

  • Rhianna fan. my arse! Someone fill me in. Any takers? :) We are the fabulous CFC...
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 19,012
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #184 on: December 28, 2013, 09:53:49 am »

Honestly it's not good enough, and the myth that Skrtel is 'a Hardman who eats nails for breakfast' needs to go away, I just can't comprehend why he's starting every game ahead of Toure or Agger
Agger being left-footed, like Sakho (though I can't really tell with him) is the only reason I can think of.
The courts, the rich, the powerful or those in authority never lie. It has been dealt with 'by the courts' nothing to see here run along.

Offline reldinho7

  • Kemlynite
  • **
  • Posts: 42
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #185 on: December 28, 2013, 10:15:11 am »
Agger being no better in the air probably has a lot to do with it too. 

Offline mrantarctica

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,951
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #186 on: December 28, 2013, 10:56:04 am »
My point—which I was really originally hoping to hear your opinion on (and still am)–possibly also why I was pissed off about it, and has probably been largely looked now at if not addressed directly, is on the "corners are not that much of a threat" stat. I mean if, say, you take all of Al's recent points about physicality, and yours about Rafa's players and coaching, and maybe some just plain old ineptitude mixed in, or lack of work on it, or whatever, is there a plunging point on the graph of the "they aren't that much of threat" statistic, where suddenly a team is below some threshold that makes them a big threat?—regularly yielding goals directly or contributing to the ratcheting up of pressure. I'm not suggesting you have that graph, but figure you've the most comprehensive experience to consider whether it is likely or not and say why it isn't if it isn't.

I believe I answered your question, which PoP validated.

We considered that the dynamics of corner taking and free kick taking are really not similar except in a very rudimentary sense (I.e. The ball is swung in usually in the air and players get on the end of it to try and score or head away). This has two major consequences (which we didn't talk about)

1) the statistics of corner taking should be considered separately from free kicks (comparing apples with apples)
2) there is an extremely narrow window for which corners can be considered goal threats (to do with angle, ball speed, swerve etc) which would effectively explain why they are a pretty low risk event with regard to conceding goals. It also means that if you simply stand around marking nobody, a significant proportion of the time the ball won't end up in the net. This is probably the threshold you're referring to and has more to do with how a corner is delivered rather than who marks who and whether you mark zonal or man vs man etc. If the delivery is good, then the chances of scoring are higher, but then how do you train your defenders to prevent good delivery from corners?

Offline lfcmaster

  • of pith
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,570
  • We all live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #187 on: December 28, 2013, 10:56:22 am »
I am worried about the goals we are conceding from set pieces
and the fact we aren't scoring goals from set pieces

Offline Hazell

  • Ultimate Movie Night Draft Winner 2017. King - or Queen - of Mystery. Hyzenthlay. The 5th Benitle's sex conch.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 76,507
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #188 on: December 28, 2013, 10:57:32 am »
I am worried about the goals we are conceding from set pieces
and the fact we aren't scoring goals from set pieces

Maybe we should get Tony Pulis in charge :P
We have to change from doubter to believer. Now.

Offline Zoomers

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,049
  • Meow
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #189 on: December 28, 2013, 10:58:32 am »
Agger being left-footed, like Sakho (though I can't really tell with him) is the only reason I can think of.

And Agger is much worse at defending headers compared to Skrtel.
Shut the fuck up and put some respek on Lucas name playboy

Offline Redman0151

  • Stills and Nash Warloch
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,967
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #190 on: December 28, 2013, 11:01:30 am »
And Agger is much worse at defending headers compared to Skrtel.

Is he? We've conceded more goals per minute from Skrtel's heading than Agger's.
"I would say we certainly have the resources to compete with anybody in football." Tom Werner 12/04/2012

Offline TheGOAT

  • Gruff handbagger
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,842
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #191 on: December 28, 2013, 11:02:09 am »

and the fact we aren't scoring goals from set pieces

Have you not seen us play this season?

Offline simply_red

  • Holding back the tears. Of negativity. Utter negativity.
  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 558
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #192 on: December 28, 2013, 11:05:54 am »
I am worried about the goals we are conceding from set pieces
and the fact we aren't scoring goals from set pieces

If I had to choose between those for sure I'd go for not conceding from set pieces.

The goals we're conceding from set pieces are really laughable not even soft.

You can't aspire to score goals from set pieces if your defending at set pieces is awful.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2013, 11:11:19 am by simply_red »
kopblocks.com

FSG out.

Online Eeyore

  • "I have no problem whatsoever stating that FSG have done a good job.".Mo Money, Mo Problems to invent. Number 1 is Carragher. Number 2 is Carragher. Number 3 is Carragher. Number 4 is Carragher. Likes to play God in his spare time.
  • Campaigns
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 31,566
  • JFT 97
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #193 on: December 28, 2013, 11:13:04 am »
Just seen this stat:

Skrtel's fault in Kompany's goal means he's now been directly at fault for 5 aerial goals, one every 284.2mins, the worst of any LFC CB.

putting that into context, nearly 25% of our goals conceded this season has came directly from Skrtel getting best in the air

Honestly it's not good enough, and the myth that Skrtel is 'a Hardman who eats nails for breakfast' needs to go away, I just can't comprehend why he's starting every game ahead of Toure or Agger
Would love to see which goals they are have you any idea.
"Ohhh-kayyy"

Offline Fromola

  • For the love of god please shut the fuck up. Lomola... “The sky is falling and I’m off to tell the King!...” Places stock in the wrong opinions. Miserable F*cker! Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to tide us over this season
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 30,621
  • Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #194 on: December 28, 2013, 11:14:32 am »
But the game isn't attack/defence. The things Clarke does to organise the defence require the whole team to be organised differently.

Not from dead balls. Admittedly we play a lot more open, and take more risks, which leaves the defence a lot more stretched.
Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to tide us over this season

Offline Fromola

  • For the love of god please shut the fuck up. Lomola... “The sky is falling and I’m off to tell the King!...” Places stock in the wrong opinions. Miserable F*cker! Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to tide us over this season
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 30,621
  • Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #195 on: December 28, 2013, 11:16:53 am »
Have you not seen us play this season?

I haven't got the stats but have we now conceded more set pieces than we've scored? If we have then that's poor for a team who probably outnumbers the opposition 2 or 3 to 1 on average in terms of corner count and free kicks.
Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to tide us over this season

Offline Funky_Gibbons

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,811
  • Follow the gourd
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #196 on: December 28, 2013, 11:17:32 am »
I am worried about the goals we are conceding from set pieces
and the fact we aren't scoring goals from set pieces
We have scored the second highest amount (11) of set piece goals this season. City are highest on 12.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2013, 11:19:08 am by Funky_Gibbons »
"And there are red and white scarves of Liverpool, and red and white bobble hats of Liverpool, and red and white rosettes of Liverpool, and nothing else. And the sun shines now."

Online Clint Eastwood

  • The man with no name
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 12,281
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #197 on: December 28, 2013, 11:22:42 am »
Agger and Skrtel are both suspect in the air. Sakho seems to be a little bit better than both of them when it comes to aerial duels, so I don't understand why Skrtel always has the task of marking the main threat?

While we're on it, against Stoke Kolo Toure won every header against Peter Crouch (pretty much). Maybe he should be considered more?

Sounds odd but I think an interesting solution to our aerial troubles may have been a certain gentleman who's unfortunately suffered a long-term lay-off.

Offline Pricey

  • Might actually be Petey.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,194
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #198 on: December 28, 2013, 11:39:48 am »
I am worried about the goals we are conceding from set pieces
and the fact we aren't scoring goals from set pieces

 :lmao :lmao

Offline i6uuaq

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Kopite
  • ******
  • Posts: 645
  • Hmm... what's this personal text thing, then?
Re: Defending Set Pieces
« Reply #199 on: December 28, 2013, 11:50:41 am »
1) the statistics of corner taking should be considered separately from free kicks (comparing apples with apples)
2) there is an extremely narrow window for which corners can be considered goal threats (to do with angle, ball speed, swerve etc) which would effectively explain why they are a pretty low risk event with regard to conceding goals. It also means that if you simply stand around marking nobody, a significant proportion of the time the ball won't end up in the net. This is probably the threshold you're referring to and has more to do with how a corner is delivered rather than who marks who and whether you mark zonal or man vs man etc. If the delivery is good, then the chances of scoring are higher, but then how do you train your defenders to prevent good delivery from corners?

Point 1 is a good one.

Point 2 about the narrow window... I don't know. We know that there are some people who can deliver good corners/free kicks quite consistently - Gerrard's been doing pretty well for us this season. It stands to reason that effective free kick takers will be tasked to take them more often than not.

I just feel really uncomfortable relying on poor delivery to justify that they aren't much of a threat. I'd imagine that good delivery can be trained quite easily, since it begins from a static position.
"I've not seen it and I'm not being Arsene Wenger," Dalglish said. "If there's something untoward then I am sure the governing body will act appropriately."