Topic: Liverpool's Defence

[Chakan]

You can put Baresi and Beckenbauer into central defence, flanked by Carlos Alberto and Maldini, and it won't fix a systemic problem.

What?! So you're saying it's the managers fault?

[Anywhichwayicant]

What?! So you're saying it's the managers fault?

Yes.

*Braces self for anti-Rodgers agenda claims*

[PhaseOfPlay]

Yes.

*Braces self for anti-Rodgers agenda claims*

He definitely shares some blame, but he is not responsible for concentration issues. What the big problem for me is how he trains the defenders.

[RedBeast]

He definitely shares some blame, but he is not responsible for concentration issues. What the big problem for me is how he trains the defenders.

Do you not think that the training (or lack of it) may be linked to the defensive issues? The goal conceded was not a systemic problem. We were not caught on the counter. It was from a throw in. Our defensive formation was set. A well drilled defense would move into the correct positions almost on auto pilot due to the constant repetition trained into them.

[PhaseOfPlay]

The training he does with defenders is actually designed for shape, rather than action. So the shape and patterns are well-drilled. Unfortunately, the other team doesn't always want to cooperate, and their unpredictable movements sometimes flummox our defenders when they get caught between what they are "supposed" to do, and what the situation actually calls for.

All coaches have weaknesses in topics that they just don't like coaching or are not as strong. Rodgers' training methods don't really seem to allow for the variation in attacks that the defenders might face, which is ironic given the mobility of our attack. I think that's why he likes strong 1v1 defenders, because it artificially boosts the back four without having to coach it much.

[surfer. Fuck you generator.]

Do you not think that the training (or lack of it) may be linked to the defensive issues? The goal conceded was not a systemic problem. We were not caught on the counter. It was from a throw in. Our defensive formation was set. A well drilled defense would move into the correct positions almost on auto pilot due to the constant repetition trained into them.

The way you've described it is a systemic issue (not talking about football systems / formations, but systemic as in viewing the team as a whole, and hence how they're programmed, ie coached)

[Mark Walters]

They shouldn't have to be drilled, it's basic zonal defending principles - compression, balance, cover (angles and distance).

You say they shouldn't be drilled but if it's not working I'd argue that perhaps they do!  If they're basic principles then these guys shouldn't be in a top flight title-challenging Premier League team!

[Notfromaroundhere]

The training he does with defenders is actually designed for shape, rather than action. So the shape and patterns are well-drilled. Unfortunately, the other team doesn't always want to cooperate, and their unpredictable movements sometimes flummox our defenders when they get caught between what they are "supposed" to do, and what the situation actually calls for.

All coaches have weaknesses in topics that they just don't like coaching or are not as strong. Rodgers' training methods don't really seem to allow for the variation in attacks that the defenders might face, which is ironic given the mobility of our attack. I think that's why he likes strong 1v1 defenders, because it artificially boosts the back four without having to coach it much.

Very interesting that. Out of interest: how do you coach to cope with action, rather than keeping the shape? As in the opposite of what you're saying he does.

By the by: the second goal we conceded at Cardiff last season was - to me at least - one of the more annoying ones we conceded. We looked like we were in balance in terms of shape, but then one fairly innocuous pass into the channel between Gerrard and Flanagan left us exposed. Is this an example of coaching shape vs action?

[PhaseOfPlay]

Very interesting that. Out of interest: how do you coach to cope with action, rather than keeping the shape? As in the opposite of what you're saying he does.

By the by: the second goal we conceded at Cardiff last season was - to me at least - one of the more annoying ones we conceded. We looked like we were in balance in terms of shape, but then one fairly innocuous pass into the channel between Gerrard and Flanagan left us exposed. Is this an example of coaching shape vs action?

You coach action by having the defenders in game situations where they are overloaded, under-loaded, and numbers even, with lots of movement, different types of attack, different types of final pass, and different types of shot, so they learn to assess when to stick to shape, and when to break the shape and go with the man. Purely zonal defending often means sticking in your position even when the correct decision is to break the shape and go to the player. We practice and play pure zonal defending. If a player is in your zone, deal with it. If they are not in your zone, it's someone else's problem. That's where we get caught out.

[na fir dearg]

I thought sometimes we were too deep at the back which left that space between defence and midfield where Ward-Prowse got a lot of possession

[Notfromaroundhere]

You coach action by having the defenders in game situations where they are overloaded, under-loaded, and numbers even, with lots of movement, different types of attack, different types of final pass, and different types of shot, so they learn to assess when to stick to shape, and when to break the shape and go with the man. Purely zonal defending often means sticking in your position even when the correct decision is to break the shape and go to the player. We practice and play pure zonal defending. If a player is in your zone, deal with it. If they are not in your zone, it's someone else's problem. That's where we get caught out.

Excellent, cheers. As you mentioned, this is ironic given the way we attack. Instinctively I'd then say it would perhaps be good to train a lot of attack vs defence, as the nature of the way we attack and the attacking players we have would force our defenders into more action-based thinking...? (Yeah, that's more of a question than a statement  )

[RK7]

Yes.

*Braces self for anti-Rodgers agenda claims*

Your right though.

[Kali Yuga]

The training he does with defenders is actually designed for shape, rather than action. So the shape and patterns are well-drilled. Unfortunately, the other team doesn't always want to cooperate, and their unpredictable movements sometimes flummox our defenders when they get caught between what they are "supposed" to do, and what the situation actually calls for.

All coaches have weaknesses in topics that they just don't like coaching or are not as strong. Rodgers' training methods don't really seem to allow for the variation in attacks that the defenders might face, which is ironic given the mobility of our attack. I think that's why he likes strong 1v1 defenders, because it artificially boosts the back four without having to coach it much.

Sorry to sidetrack you, but am I right in thinking that you've previously posted a coaching tree on here that illustrates the relationships / influences between the likes of Aloysius Paulus Maria "Louis" van Gaal, Mourinho, AVB, BR etc? I've searched but can't find it anywhere, and I'd like to see it again if possible...

Also, to keep on topic. I hope Rodgers is ready and willing to drop Johnson for Moreno. Johnson's never really been a sub in his time here, he's either started or been injured. But now seems the time. Manquillo did well, and Moreno was obviously bought to be the first choice left back. With that in mind, I'll be disappointed if Brendan persists with Johnson through a spell of bad form.

[kcbworth]

Ironically when I see this thread title my mind immediately says

Lovren
Agger
Sakho
Skrtel
Kolo Toure
Ilori
Coates
Wisdom
Kelly

and I think... wow, we have such great defenders! Best in the league!

But then, I realise that the thread is discussing how poor we are in defence.

Ironic and very weird

[GrkStav]

I don't think Lovren was too tight at all to Tadic. It's easy to say that in hindsight because he was done by a backheel, but Tadic ran from behind him, then checked to receive, so Lovren had to get tight to prevent the turn. If he'd dropped off him, he might not have been done by the backheel, but Tadic would have been able to turn and then we would have had Clyne AND Tadic in positions to shoot, being defended by one player. It's possible he could maybe have gone an arms length away at most, but in the pattern of play AS it was occurring, Lovren made the best decision he could have, given the circumstances.

The pictures from the 71st/72nd minute chance (repeat use of the same play) probably support your analysis even more. In that case, Lovren didn't get quite as tight and the man he was marking 'got turned' and passed the ball into space in the box whilst facing Mignolet's goal. Had both Clyne and the other fellow (Ward-Prowse?) not run in towards the same ball at the same time) we could just as easily have conceded ANOTHER goal from the same play. As it happened, the two SFC players sort of slowing down to avoid clattering one another, plus the relative distances involved allowed Johnson and Skrtel to recover, block the attempt and deal with the rebound.

[GrkStav]

Regarding Sterling  and Johnson I think you are missing the winger on the touch line. Clyne is the fullback carrying the ball but you can see the shadow presumably of the winger on the touchline that they were covering. The winger later appears in the bottom right hand corner as Clyne shoots for goal.

Exactly right. Now, why exactly both Sterling (more understandable) AND Johnson should be so concerned with the winger on the side line will perhaps be explained by PoP. To me, that's an example of players defending being too keen to 'track' the movement (heck, the mere presence in this case) of an opposing player. Johnson, to me, was partly at fault (minor compared to Lucas) for their goal.

[GrkStav]

No idea. Same as the others, I suppose - fell asleep ball-watching. The only three players switched on in that whole passage of play were Lovren, Mignolet and Manquillo. Everyone else defended like kids.

Truth delivered with the accuracy of a hospital doctor (and his/her brusque bed-side manner). The truth hurts but also will set us 'free'.

[Draex]

Just accept Lucas is not the messiah and slowly dismantle the doll of him you crafted from spandex last summer.

[-Daws-]

It's an area we will see quite dramatically improve this season.

Our biggest problem has consistently been concentration levels in the centre of midfield, at full back and at centre half. You can of course brow into the mix our attacking verve, leaving players isolated, but all too often it's tracking runners, just like yesterday. Agger, despite his technical qualities, has paid the price for switching off and letting players run past him without following. Skrtel irradicated this from his game a lot, and is why he has been back in the side. Lovren is extremely aware and his vocal skills keep those around him alert as well which is why he was the only centre half we courted all summer. We will improve significantly with his addition alone. 1v1 he's very good, but that's not the major reason he was both here.

It's about keeping shape yes but it's also about taking responsibility in your zone, how your zone relates to those around you (positioning in reference to your team mates - an area Skrtel somewhat failed yesterday as he should have been a yard to the left to cover) and it was Gerrard, Lucas and Johnson failed to take any responsibility vocally or physically. Gerrard a shout to Lucas? If not Lucas has to react but isn't mobile enough? Either of the two from Johnson? None of this happened, and that's why they scored.

The Gerrard / Lucas problem has come up a lot as a pair, some of us muting it a year ago and that still exists. Neither are mobile enough and both can fall asleep especially when a runner goes past them. This is also a Rodgers problem as you'd expect that by now, he'd have thrown this idea out with the bath water. We've improved our defenders yes, but if you leave them completely exposed they won't be able to cover every time. Pure law of averages dictates that.

[GrkStav]

Just accept Lucas is not the messiah and slowly dismantle the doll of him you crafted from spandex last summer.

Thank you for those insightful remarks. Delivered eloquently and with the utmost respect towards their intended audience.

[LiverBirdKop]

Just accept Lucas is not the messiah and slowly dismantle the doll of him you crafted from spandex last summer.

wtf??

[GrkStav]

wtf??

Yep! It's quite evocative, I'll say that in its favor.

It's not like it's intended to belittle me. It's not like it's intended to goad me into responding as any normal person would (and get banned for it, probably rightly). Nope, it's a perfectly acceptable retort.

[Robbo1980]

i thought the actual defence as a unit did well, quite aggressive but a little deep at times, cleared what we had to, it wasnt calm & composed defending at times but in the conditions it got us over the line.
We conceded some good chances to a good southampton team but for me that was due to a lack of protection, with Lucas & SG playing central & Jordan being wasted on the right we lacked everything in midfield for protecting, pace, energy, power and tracking...it was a strange decision by BR in terms of formation & personnel as we have barely played this was over the last 12 months, i cant see him repeating it even at City, although maybe he played it with City in mind to have a look at it.

I think Manquillo looks the business, he reminds me of our own Jose Enrique in his defending, very strong 1v1 but he makes decisions quicker than Jose, positionally he looks good.
Lovren looks like he has been here for years already & his partnership with Skrtel can flourish once the balance of the team improves.

Im looking forward to seeing Moreno added to the mix, obviously better known as a attacking FB but he looks aggressive and knows his position well, gain looks strong 1v1

[DanA]

The back four itself was excellent I thought. Even Johnson did alright. The midfield in front of it though IMO was completely lost and overrun.

To me it makes a lot of sense to pull Henderson back into a 4-1-2-3 and use Can but that's for the boss to decide.

[SquirrelandGman]

I do agree the crux of the issue is Brendan himself..hopefully he wins us the league this season to shut me up.

[Funky_Gibbons]

I do agree the crux of the issue is Brendan himself..hopefully he wins us the league this season to shut me up.

Yeah totally agree. Couldn't care less that we almost won the league last season, finishing in between the two richest clubs in the league, until he wins the thing we should moan about his tactics 

[ReeNah]

You guys don't think we'll eventually end up with a Lovren/Sahko partnership?

[WorldChampions]

You guys don't think we'll eventually end up with a Lovren/Sahko partnership?

I would like to see it given a go. The issue could be that they are both front foot defenders, I always think it works best if one of the CBs drops back in to sweep up behind whilst the other presses the ball.

[steveeastend]

No idea. Same as the others, I suppose - fell asleep ball-watching. The only three players switched on in that whole passage of play were Lovren, Mignolet and Manquillo. Everyone else defended like kids.

Lovren switched off too IMO, the way he went into this tackle was like in a training session. As the game went on he got tired, mentally, just as a lot of others..

[ReeNah]

I would like to see it given a go. The issue could be that they are both front foot defenders, I always think it works best if one of the CBs drops back in to sweep up behind whilst the other presses the ball.

With Manquillo and Monero as well, we'd have the most aggressive backline in the league lol

[Draex]

I would like to see it given a go. The issue could be that they are both front foot defenders, I always think it works best if one of the CBs drops back in to sweep up behind whilst the other presses the ball.

Skrtel isn't a sweeper defender in the slightest as evident when he didn't move to cover Lovren stepping forward to mark Tadic.

Sakho and Lovren will be our best pairing before this season is out, both are world class potentially, Martin whilst a top player is at his peak and I don't see him changing his game at such a late stage of his career.

[SquirrelandGman]

Yeah totally agree. Couldn't care less that we almost won the league last season, finishing in between the two richest clubs in the league, until he wins the thing we should moan about his tactics 

He's still a young manager who'll get better and learn from his mistakes. If you really think the bad defence was all down individual errors.. Well there's nothing more for me to add.  

[GrkStav]

Lovren switched off too IMO, the way he went into this tackle was like in a training session. As the game went on he got tired, mentally, just as a lot of others..

Doesn't take any of the blame away from any other player, but I still think that Lovren's man, Tadic, being able with two touches (first touch bring the ball slightly outside of the box, second touch stops and in one-motion step-backheels it backward and diagonally into open space in the box) to completely neutralize Lovren and Johnson is not exactly the result of 'good defending' by Lovren. Yeah his positioning is good, and he didn't let his man 'get turned' but . . . his man didn't need to get turned in order to deliver the pass right behind Lovren. Lovren was as clueless as where the ball was as Lucas.

Lovren picks up Tadic's check-run (like a post-up at the high-post in basketball). Skrtel moves not one bit in response. He stays about 2-3 yards away from Manquillo who's tuned in and marking his man closely. (Although, shouldn't he really be goal-side of Pelle' instead of behind him?) In fairness, when Skrtel does see the ball get into the area and Clyne sprinting towards it he does snap to and attempts the last ditch block.

Note that Pelle' is pointing to his feet as Clyne is getting to the ball for his shot as he moves towards him and the ball.


In fairness, the only player who really had a direct view of what Tadic was doing with the ball was Johnson.

Watch Clyne pause about a foot before he reaches the 18-yard line and then take off as soon as Tadic has released the ball backwards.

And who watches the pass from Clyne to Tadic and the entire run of Clyne? Gerrard. Yes, Lucas should have both seen it and tracked it. But as it happened it occurred behind him. It was right in front of Gerrard, he could see it unfold. Btw, notice how little Gerrard moves in the entire sequence.

Can someone also explain to me why Coutinho backs away from Clyne at the beginning of the play? I can sort of see why Sterling moves away (to keep an eye on their winger). But then, so does Johnson.

Lucas first comes out with Ward-Prowse and as he (W-P) moves towards the center of the pitch he lets him go and moves towards the ball as it is traveling towards Tadic. He then gets sucked into Tadic but manages to move backwards and to turn to his right.

Tadic then runs towards the bench and points towards it. Dollars to donuts they had practiced that play a LOT in preparation for this match.

[Robbo1980]

From that 'it seems' skrtel hasnt covered the space well enough but he couldnt see the ball, until Clynes run is not tracked Skrtels position is fine, once the runs isnt tracked and the back heel takes place Skrtel reacts quite quickly but it was too late;

I know there is a winger we cant see but there was no need for Johnson to move wide at that point, Sterling was a good covering position, although he is on the move already Tadic reacts to the space created by Glens movement:

Several people culpable in some way, i wouldnt be overly having a dig at Lovren, he got tight, maybe he over protected a ball inside too much, he cant try and nick the ball from behind so what does he do? sometimes you get done by a piece of skill:

Gerrard sees it all, there is a chance he had 1 eye on ward prowse (i dont think that tho, he was ball watching during the whole thing) but had the ball broken out, Gerrard has switched off again and let ward prowse get away from him....

It was a well worked goal, hats off to Southampton, lets assume & hope it was a almost ( i realise it almost happened again) isolated incident and we will learn from it

[steveeastend]

Doesn't take any of the blame away from any other player,

I hate to say it but to me the first mistake was coming from Sterling as he was covering space behind him without any need as there was Johnson behind and nobody running into it. He moved AWAY instead of going into a tackle and trying to prevent him from passing.

It was the FIRST mistake in a chain of mistakes, a collective dip in concentration.

[Robbo1980]

in fact, watching it again and again, once Lucas goes to engage the player with the ball Clyne, he has to follow that run no matter what....

[GrkStav]

The funny thing is that Lucas 'tracks' (basically without intending to) Clyne until he gets to the 18-yard line . . . of course, having not really 'tracked' him, he doesn't see Clyne take off like a madman towards the ball as soon as he sees Tadic release it.

A joy for SFC supporters and neutrals to watch, masochistic for us (the obvious and I are 'tight', aren't we?).

[GrkStav]

in fact, watching it again and again, once Lucas goes to engage the player with the ball Clyne, he has to follow that run no matter what....

You and PoP have said that, and I have to accept that that is the correct interpretation.

Had he attempted to intercept the pass from Clyne to Tadic, would that have been a big, basic no-no?

Btw, I think it's too kind to call Lucas's movement in the general direction of Clyne after he 'releases' Ward-Prowse (for who run he first came out) "Lucas going to engage Clyne". He moved a couple of steps in the general direction of Clyne and the 'flight' (I know it was on the ground) of the ball towards Tadic.

[smicer07]

Personally I think their goal should be put down to an exceptional piece of skill by Tadic rather than anything we did wrong.

[steveeastend]

in fact, watching it again and again, once Lucas goes to engage the player with the ball Clyne, he has to follow that run no matter what....

Of course, at least giving it a try. Just as Sterling should have gone into this tackle and not moving away from the player. And just as Lovren should have show a different attitude in his "tackle" and Skrtel probably a little bit quicker mentally in order to cover for the space behind him Lovren.

Personally I think their goal should be put down to an exceptional piece of skill by Tadic rather than anything we did wrong.

I agree.