Interesting that article in the OP, though. Neither Skrtel or Lucas come out of it well at all, in fact I'd go as far as to say it's quite scathing on both! Lucas won't play much this year but it does make somewhat concerning reading if Skrtel is going to be part of our #1 CB pairing. I do worry that the fairly opposing defensive tendencies of Skrtel and Lovren might leave us a bit at sea sometimes, but we'll have to wait and see I suppose.
Just as long as we stop conceding two or three goals to absolutely rancid teams. Please, no more!
It is scathing on both. And, in my non-expert but considered judgment, unfairly (to put it mildly) scathing, bordering on the delusional. The author(s) seem to be quite self-assured that they understand football, formations, the duties and responsibilities of various positions, how the 'double-pivot' should operate, etc.
Based on my own 'education' here by the folks who are truly expert, I found their analyses to be premised on (what appear to me to be) false premises and erroneous criteria.
Prime example of that is their constant reference to players, especially midfielders (Gerrard does not escape their wrath), "failing to track" opponents making "runs". Taking their basic argument to its logical conclusion, all runs by opponents must be "tracked", otherwise a defensive failure or error has occurred. To me, this is absolute nonsense. If we ever faced opponents who did that, we would annihilate them with the greatest of ease.
Furthermore, the approach of only looking at 'failures' (i.e. goals conceded) is decidedly pre-scientific (I am being generous). These folks do not like the double-pivot with Lucas and Gerrard as the pivots. Therefore, any goal conceded that could be remotely, tendentially, somehow be related to the presence of both Gerrard and Lucas on the pitch and their deployment as a 'double pivot' is "evidence" that "demonstrates" the truth of their (literal) prejudice.
