Author Topic: Systems - Mindgames  (Read 29778 times)

Offline BreakfastPercy

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,381
  • Follow me: @BreakfastPercy
Systems - Mindgames
« on: February 2, 2013, 04:28:02 am »
Browse the Brendan Rodgers gift shop, and you’ll find plenty of mugs, coasters, and Sergio Georgini jackets adorned with his famous slogan ‘you train dogs, I like to educate players’. It’s a trite little expression, and has only encouraged those who claim he’s a chancer in a simple game. But that’s football, and the modern ‘Head Coach’ gets less slack than John Terry’s sex leash. It’s a mindset predicated on the basis that it is the fans who are to be convinced by the 'philosophy', the fans who must be secure in the 'System', and of course us fans aren't impressed because we've seen it all before.

What’s sometimes lost is that the players haven't seen it all before.

Consider the average career of a top professional footballer. A Heskey-style shot in the dark gives him maybe ten years at the top. The same footballer is likely to have perhaps three to five managers during that time. When you're playing the manager lottery, those odds suggest a forward-thinking, idealistic manager is rare. In the Midlands, Alex McLeish virtually destroys that equation on his own. We supporters might politely decline Rodgers’ reinvention of the wheel, but in all honesty his sound-bites are little more than courtesy. The dogmatic approach to System and philosophy isn’t for us fans, despite what social media says.


"Our playing system does not depend on the individual"


You would be forgiven for thinking that was another one from the Brendan Rodgers bingo list, but they’re the less-famous words of Volker Finke, who took over SC Freiburg in 1991 and began an era that led his Chairman Achim Stocker to exclaim 'the only man who can fire Finke is Finke himself'. A revolutionary student of football, Finke almost single-handedly exposed the mythology of the German sweeper and ushered in the notion of 'Concept Football'. A glimpse of his ethos from the man himself:
Quote
"It's boring to switch flanks and knock the ball from one wing to the other. We build through the middle, where there is little space. You play three or four short passes to lure the defense into what they think is the danger zone. And then you suddenly open up the game over the flanks - that's what is really dangerous."
Whisper it quietly, but in 1993 Finke also approached fifty industry leaders in a Moneyball-style consultation on how limited funds could actually be turned into a market advantage. Good luck with that one Brendan!

And so the term 'Concept Football' was born, and has since been revived by comparisons with Jürgen Klopp's Dortmund. Klopp's mutant footballing bumblebee is getting a lot of plaudits for it too. An extremely well drilled squad, sacrosanct footballing principles, and exciting young players are all playing their part in making Europe's most fashionable new team. Like Finke’s team though, what really sets Dortmund apart is their mentality. Inspired by a near psychopathic coach, they are showing not just what a system can do for the feet, but also for the heart.
Quote
“I don't want team leaders. That's a line of thinking that buries other players' strengths. Our playing system does not depend on the individual.”
Words again from Finke, which put through the Klopp modernizer, give us this:
Quote
"My boys are mentality monsters!"
From generation to generation, the strength drawn by players from a conceptually defined System has both reflected and improved their ability to employ that System. Many noticed the weary legs of Barcelona’s players in the Spanish team of Euro 2012, nearly as many derided them as ‘boring’, and yet they drew strength from their footballing principles, stuck to their ‘superior’ form of football, and ultimately it was a crutch to their victory. It’s a notion not uncommon in politics, religion, and many other walks of life, but fighting for the ‘greater good’ is not something given much credence in football. Yet as teams willing to buy into brave footballing ideologies have consistently shown for decades, the benefits of playing for a ‘higher purpose’, something more than the pragmatic, are very real.


The Old Currencies: Confidence and Arrogance


In Finke’s days football’s psychology department was at best embryonic, and it traded on the notion of ‘confidence’ that is still the mainstay of football now. The decriers of Daniel Sturridge’s move to Liverpool claimed talent-subverting arrogance, but arrogance in football has long been a mechanism for protecting players from form-battering, performance-motivated sport.

Still, we’ve always criticized those footballers displaying signs of arrogance, despite the demands we make of them. That was rarely more evident than after the London 2012 Olympics, as Michael Owen recounted of a conversation with his wife (a hand-waxed mahogany Dildo he calls ‘Louise’):
Quote
"I turned to my wife, Louise, while sat in our lounge at home watching the Olympics, and said, 'just you watch footballers get hammered once this is over'. And here we are two weeks on with the bandwagon in full flow."
To be fair to Micky Mercenary, footballers were pilloried for not being their squeaky clean, steroid-infused and blood-transfused Olympian counterparts. Footballers, it seemed, were an arrogance that had suckled the teat of sport till it was but a withered, gruesome husk resembling Arsene Wenger on all fours.

The difficulty is that Olympians are amateur sportspeople, and as such attract amateur support. That's not a slight against the Olympics, I myself went to watch the tennis. But win, lose or draw, I'd have clapped and smiled like Joe Cole licking windows and had a jolly good day out. Bravo, well done, who did we want to win again? An Olympian's loss is borne by an entire nation, and as far as International rivalries go the public really aren't au fait. Rake those dull embers with a sparsity of competition and actual geographical distance, and you're left with a different environment to the one a footballer endures.

Football’s 'professional' supporters increase the variance of morale and form tenfold, and we shouldn’t be so surprised that many who crack the elite tier of football have developed a kind of faux-arrogant self-defense. It doesn’t justify football’s ‘arrogance’ but it helps explain it, and that arrogance is intrinsically linked to motivation.


Skim Science: Arrogance


The difficulty with arrogance is that whilst it serves a purpose in protecting performance-related motivation, it also has its own drawbacks. Jennifer Beer and Brent L. Hughes published research they conducted at the University of Texas Imaging Research Center in February 2010, which showed that the more you view yourself as desirable or better than your peers, the less you use a portion of your brain’s frontal lobes. The Orbifrontal cortex is generally associated with reasoning, planning, decision-making and problem-solving. So, if Gervinho's adapted forehead is built to house an overactive frontal lobe, it may well explain why he consistently chokes when faced with whether to shoot, pass, or buy tassel-ties for his fringe.

By association, the Dunning–Kruger effect highlights a cognitive bias in which unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly overestimating their own ability. Simply: bad players don’t know how bad they are. This causes issues with evaluation, performance and development.

The classic currency of ‘arrogance’ leaves managers with a choice between unconfident decision makers and arrogant unteachables. As a result, football is reluctantly seeking alternatives to performance-based motivation, and it’s no surprise that Brendan Rodgers has enlisted some help with his System’s ‘greater good’.


Liverpool FC & Executing the System


‘You train dogs, I like to educate players’ opined Rodgers, but ‘building machines’ is perhaps a little more apt, for that is the ideal a modern coach strives for. Liverpool’s recent cherry-picking of leading sports psychiatrist Dr Steve Peters is not just aimed at making a player believe in the System, it’s about equipping him with the motivation to accomplish it.

Blood and thunder comebacks may be the stuff of romance, but consistency and technical execution are perfection in the over-analysis age. It’s preferable a player relies on pre-planned, conceptually sound training above in-the-moment, high variance, emotion-dictated judgment. As Finke himself said (as FC Köln Sporting Director) of Lucas Podolski in an interview with Bild:
Quote
“He is 26 years old and approaching his 100th international game, which says everything about his quality. He can be a great football player. But he [does not play like] a seasoned veteran who can always give a strong performance.

He depends on emotion, environment, mentality. His time at Bayern confirmed that."
Encouraging players to rely on the strategy and the motions of the collective, above some mythical x-factor of talent multiplied by form, is still unconventional in football. Former Schalke manager Ralf Rangnick was asked if success could be planned:
Quote
“Not success, but performance. We see our young players as blue chips. They contribute speed, technical skills, good basic tactical training, a willingness to learn, determination and a special ‘weapon’, depending on the position they play. The trick is to equip these highly qualified individual players with something strategic as well.”
It all reflects an emphasis on principles and training ground work that can be planned and perfected in advance. If Dr Steve Peters is the ‘mind mechanic’ he calls himself, then Stewart Downing arrived gripping an unattached steering wheel wistfully mouthing the words ‘brum brum’. That was a direct result of a player who was crippled by performance motivation; too self-reliant. It’s great when a player is riding a wave of optimism, but ultimately more unstable and vulnerable.

Dr Peter Boltersdorf is the owner of the ‘Reiss Profile’ (a scientifically valid, standardized assessment of motivation in over 500 professional footballers) and has worked with Jürgen Klopp. He explains further the move from reliance on performance-motivation:
Quote
“Failure defines individual differences openly and then there are allegations among themselves (teammates), and at once out of the whole situation a very strong team becomes weak. And this happens even if the behavior of the individual player is exactly the same in success and in defeat. Success connects people, failure separates. The task of team development is to reduce this dependence.”
As well as faith in methodology, he suggests other ways to motivate players:
Quote
“Interests shown on the basis of common life occurrences (reduce success dependence). It's no secret that family life plays a big role with many footballers. By saying: ‘People, let's play today so that our children are proud of us.' That grabs everyone, because the children and the family have a meaning. That's a real reason for performance. And it emphasizes the commonality.”
Watching Luis Suarez wheel away to celebrate every goal with a tribute to his wife and daughter, it’s hard not to infer that Liverpool FC’s most motivated and consistent performer somehow embodies this. As a player who has structured his career around his sweetheart (Suarez moved to Europe to be closer to his now wife Sofia), Suarez has always been quick to expound family values. And despite repeated footballing setbacks, he has suffered virtually no ‘lack of confidence’ (as it would be in old money).

Whilst Suarez may have had it all along, there has been progress from the likes of Jordan Henderson and Stewart Downing too. They have begun to shed the burden of performance and are better for it. Of course Liverpool will have to wait and see how the squad’s mentality develops over time, and whether improvements survive, but the early signs are there. The challenge Brendan Rodgers faces is not just motivating players with his newfangled ‘System’, but also motivating players every week to apply it to the right level. If the theory is right, then this multi-front offensive to get the players reliant on his ‘System’, may just turn out to be as important- and indeed pioneering- as Rodgers made out all those months ago.
« Last Edit: February 2, 2013, 04:36:40 am by BreakfastPercy »

Offline PhaseOfPlay

  • Well red.Tom Jones Lover. AKA Debbie McGee. Apparently.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 28,289
  • Under 7s Coaching Manual Owner.
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #1 on: February 2, 2013, 05:29:54 am »
Excellent.

No.

Better than excellent.
Better looking than Samie.

royhendo

  • Guest
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #2 on: February 2, 2013, 08:51:52 am »
It's absolutely tremendous, this. Tremendous. Well done!

So, two distinct stages, eh?

The first would be coaxing more out of players through paternal praise. I think that's true in all walks of life, but then we're all humans - we're all broadly wired the same way. Any good teacher would tell you how it works.

I remember as a kid, my PE teacher took me aside after a game and told me how well I'd done that day and why. I can remember the conversation as vividly as if it were yesterday. It was one of the best moments of my life. In my eyes he opened up the belief that if I did the right things, I could do just about anything, and I still look back to that moment from time to time these days. It definitely influences the way I speak to my own kids.

Paul Dalglish blogged on the subject this morning.
http://pauldalglish.tumblr.com/  I think the same applies regardless of how old you are.

Just this month, the old fella along the road did a talk at Harvard. He said, "For a player – and for any human being – there is nothing better than hearing ‘well done’. Those are the two best words ever invented in sport.”

(It's not that different in sports writing, is it? Haha!)

So a Podolski will do well if he gets a few tender strokes from his coach and feels happy clappy smily about the working environment.

But as Boltersdorf says, "The task of team development is to reduce this dependence.” It's my favourite subject, this very point. I mean it's my very favourite topic of conversation.

How well you systematise this 'graduation from dependence' dictates in large part how sustainable your success is going to be. So in the Ferguson article, he betrays how he does the same - he bakes 'something bigger than the individual' into the mix. Ferguson redefines 'talent'. He says, "“I tell them that hard work is a talent, too. They need to work harder than anyone else. And if they can no longer bring the discipline that we ask for here at United, they are out. I am only interested in players who really want to play for United, and who, like me, are ‘bad losers’.” Hard work is talent. Hard work is 'for United'.

Talent being something a player aspires to being tagged with, the player will be more likely to become a habitual hard worker.

Mourinho and Rui Faria go further than that. They redefine the concept of 'fitness'. If you're a player, as with 'talent', you want to be considered 'fit'. The phrase 'fit for selection' is the entire basis of your livelihood, and by extension will be a large part of your self-image, no?

Mourinho and Faria define fitness thus. “For us, to say that this or that player is in great physical shape is a mistake. The player is either fit or not. And what do we mean by being fit? It is to be physically well and to be part of a game plan which a player knows inside out. With regard to the psychological side, which is essential to play at the highest level, a fit player feels confident, cooperates with and believes in his teammates, and shows solidarity towards them. All of this put together means a player is fit and it is reflected in playing well.”

So that bakes in what Boltersdorf is talking about. It's core to Mourinho's approach - the Personality Cult in a Box. It's why he's leaking that there are "three black sheep that harm the group" at Real Madrid. If he gets rid of Ramos, Casillas and whoever the third one is, he could be at Real Madrid for years. But he won't.

As Ferguson says, “Some... clubs have changed managers so many times that it creates power for the players in the dressing room... That is very dangerous.”

It's hard to bake in that 'something bigger than yourself' at some clubs.

Anyway, this was absolutely brilliant. I can't wait to see how the thread unfolds.
« Last Edit: February 2, 2013, 09:51:34 am by royhendo »

royhendo

  • Guest
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #3 on: February 2, 2013, 10:23:44 am »
On the graduation - the growing immunity from praise and blame, and a more balanced 'Peters-esque' outlook on their own and the team's collective performance, Henderson and Wisdom gave some nice insight. Yes, it's a sanitised media interview in both cases, but it's illuminating.

Henderson first...

"That's what I needed to get my head around the most: that I had to do it all the time, not just occasionally. When you come to a club like Liverpool you need to perform straight away and consistently. Looking back, I don't think I did that. There were games when I thought I'd played well. It just wasn't every single week and that isn't enough for a club like Liverpool. I needed to learn that."

On Joey Barton ripping him to shreds on Twitter after his Euros call up...

"I don't know him and I wouldn't ever let that affect me. Joey likes to express his feelings and that's clearly how he felt at the time. That's his opinion. It doesn't bother me at all."

On the Fulham thing in the summer.

"It wasn't a nice thing to hear. I didn't want to go anywhere. I wasn't playing regularly and they gave me the option if I wanted to go. I told them: 'No, I don't want to, I want to keep fighting for my place.' I came to Liverpool wanting to stay here for the rest of my career. I certainly didn't want to leave after a year."

"OK, it might not have gone to plan at the start, but I knew I could turn around and get it right. I knew I just had to take it on the chin. Even though I wasn't in the team, I felt that if I kept going, kept working hard, kept fighting, I would get my chance again, and that I would take it."


On the criticism after Oldham.

"Everyone knows that he was right... He didn't go too far. Everyone at this club and inside this dressing room were shocked and pretty disgusted at how we performed. No disrespect to Oldham, but we have to be going there and winning quite comfortably. What he did was good man-management in my view and it has given us all the kick up the backside we perhaps needed."

"But I don't think what's happened will have done me any harm. I think I might have needed it, to be honest. You will get criticism throughout your career. All the best players have had it at some stage and they haven't let it ruin their careers. I won't either."




Wisdom now...

On Rodgers post-Oldham.

"He could criticise us that way more often... maybe he should say more that we need to win these type of games."

On aspects you mention above...

"You just have to be a leader on the pitch and be vocal in a way that the players appreciate... You have to get your point across in the right way and try not to knock someone's confidence; command a respect in the team but not take it too much to make it arrogance."

On Borrell being his mentor and texting with criticism on how he dealt with a cross at Old Trafford...

"That's good. As a player you need the positives but also the things you might not want to hear."

Online Mr Dilkington

  • would rather be too cold than too hot
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 11,593
  • Never buy the Sun
    • www.level3football.com
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #4 on: February 2, 2013, 12:24:51 pm »
Fantastic stuff.

I'm way behind on this type of thing, but it's still great insight all the same.
You change all the lead, sleeping in my head, as the day grows dim, I hear you sing a golden hymn.

Offline Vulmea

  • Almost saint-like.....
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,329
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #5 on: February 2, 2013, 01:55:19 pm »
Interesting but it seems to be vested in the system being a structure which can't utilise emotion - it has a germanic clinical feel to it - likewise rafa's grinding machine had a certain Romanic military belief to it of discipline over creativity - surely the best system is one that takes the very best from every player and uses it to produce something bigger than its parts. We are back again to defining something that works for LFC and its culture not a ready made Barca lite or Klopp mark II.

Belief in a system is one thing but we can see at United that belief in club can be more important, with Mourinho that the cult of personality belief in a leader still flourishes - for me club transcends system - even above we talk about managers and clubs nor 4231, 442  counterattcking football or defensive depth etc - so system is already a more holistic thing than a mere playing formation or style.

Rodgers I'm assuming is a celt and will hopefully define a third way one which can blend creativity/individuality with structure - at least thats were we should be heading if we dont just want to be pale imitations of everybody else - whether Rodgers has that in him, whether he has the personality to carve out an identity for LFC  I'm not sure but he's got to be allowed to try - Liverpool repeatedly achieved this through three decades - we had a club that allowed individuals to flourish, that utilised the mommentum of the crowd, the belief in the club, in each other - the ideas of the Liverpool Way, a 'Liverpool player', this is Anfield - we created a legend which provided a crutch in hard times.

United enjoy a mental edge on every club in the league as we did for decades - they expect to win everybody else expects to lose - its a powerful force - for me it explains how such poor United sides have won titles - it influences media, refs, players alike - it gives an advantage when fractions are important

going forward imagine a team that feels the momentum of a game shift, that can adapt to say an Arsenal defence which is cacking itself for no apparent reason, which can utilise the electricity in the air in a CL semi or the desperation of the last 5 minutes of a cup tie - I could settle for a relentless personless machine - it would have been nice over the past 20 years but if we are dreaming of the future, why not dream big? I want to see us build something that feeds my imagination that makes Liverpool a bastion of invincibility for that the belief has to be in LFC not a 'system' but  a club.
The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate, contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.

John F. Kennedy/Shanklyboy.

royhendo

  • Guest
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #6 on: February 2, 2013, 02:35:59 pm »
"Interesting, but..."

Do you ever agree with an o.p. Vulmea?

Where does it say not to use emotion? It says it's good to get players to a stage where they're not reliant on it as a crutch, no? If you read BreakfastPercy's post there's nothing that contradicts the points you're making.

Contrary for the sake of being contrary.

Offline Vulmea

  • Almost saint-like.....
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,329
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #7 on: February 2, 2013, 02:41:59 pm »
"Interesting, but..."

Do you ever agree with an o.p. Vulmea?

Where does it say not to use emotion? It says it's good to get players to a stage where they're not reliant on it as a crutch, no? If you read BreakfastPercy's post there's nothing that contradicts the points you're making.

Contrary for the sake of being contrary.

if you say so.
The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate, contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.

John F. Kennedy/Shanklyboy.

Offline BreakfastPercy

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,381
  • Follow me: @BreakfastPercy
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #8 on: February 2, 2013, 03:05:25 pm »
True it's perhaps uninspiring in theory but I don't think that translates to fans. I mean I don't think Barca or Dortmund's teams are dispassionate as such, but then of course that's still in the realms of 'old money' as I've labelled it. All you see is good players playing well.

we had a club that allowed individuals to flourish, that utilised the mommentum of the crowd, the belief in the club, in each other - the ideas of the Liverpool Way, a 'Liverpool player', this is Anfield - we created a legend which provided a crutch in hard times.

Yep and all of those are possible non-performance based motivations which can be healthy for a player to use. The problem being that the crowd themselves are largely performance-motivated themselves, and as Boltersdorf says you only gain the commonality of belief in club and teammates through shared experience. It has interesting connotations for the growing idea that the fans need motivating too.

I may see United differently as I absolutely see a team that mechanically executes their system and style right up until the final whistle. Their unshaking belief in their system has led to victories which in turn have created the fear that other teams feel.

Boltersdorf relevant to the United point:
Quote
"I like to talk of crunch time, the term is not limited to football in the closing stages of a game. It's about who is under better control in crunch time, and are mainly players who are mentally very strong. Even that would be a reason for me that certain players in a final are not to be used in important situations, because they lose the ability to control."

the ideas of the Liverpool Way, a 'Liverpool player', this is Anfield

I think Suarez (a troublesome Uruguayan with a unique playing style) has shown that there is no such thing as a 'Liverpool player' other than what loosely fits what we desire to see in our team at the time. Really any 'Liverpool player' is one that is playing to the level, and in the way, that we want. Performance-motivated players are more susceptible to 'bad form' and therefore times when they're not what we want in a 'Liverpool player'.

Also the arrogance that we're special, that 'we're Liverpool with Liverpool players' kind of steps dangerously into the Dunning-Kruger territory I mentioned. I see plenty of people say that those who accept certain bad performances are feeble, not of a Liverpool mentality, but the danger is that illusory superiority stops us from accurately evaluating (and improving) ourselves. I think it's Steve Peters who said that players reach about 85% of their performance level and think that they're doing great and lose that drive to improve i.e. when you think you're good you don't know how bad you are.

All in all though, as Roy says, I don't actually think we disagree. The problem may be that the theory disconnects you from the exciting end product on the pitch, whereas for me it's a happy marriage.
« Last Edit: February 2, 2013, 03:23:35 pm by BreakfastPercy »

Offline BreakfastPercy

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,381
  • Follow me: @BreakfastPercy
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #9 on: February 2, 2013, 03:35:47 pm »
On the graduation - the growing immunity from praise and blame, and a more balanced 'Peters-esque' outlook on their own and the team's collective performance, Henderson and Wisdom gave some nice insight. Yes, it's a sanitised media interview in both cases, but it's illuminating.

Yeah that's a great point Roy and I think it's why this week- with some fairly important criticism- I found the will to finish the piece off. It feels like a seminal moment in the aging of our side.

Here's the Boltersdorf interview for those interested (it's in German):

http://www.spox.com/de/sport/fussball/themenwoche/trainingsmethodik/Artikel/peter-boltersdorf-mentalcoach-interview-belohnung-frustration.html

The reason those comments and the squad reaction are important comes from that article:

Quote
"A gifted player who in revenge/struggle has a very low value may be a problem with the coach. Most coaches always want to see the absolute bite, even in training. So a defeated player always hears the criticism that he had not fought enough, not given anything. A win gives the same player, although he has not played differently, just the opposite. This shows the paradoxical way the perception of winning and losing is marked. This has nothing to do with reality."

That's pertinent to Downing who at times last season tried hard, still performed badly, and within that paradox is criticized as not trying which effects him worse and doesn't reflect reality.

After the Oldham game the players seemed to accept that they didn't fight enough, and so Rodgers' criticism is really effective if our they're not completely performance motivated. I think in light of that, some of the controversy caused by Rodgers comments was justified, because of the way footballs always been. In hindsight though, this is where Steve Peters could really be earning his crust.
« Last Edit: February 2, 2013, 03:43:33 pm by BreakfastPercy »

royhendo

  • Guest
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #10 on: February 2, 2013, 04:59:14 pm »
if you say so.

Here's your own thread. http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=301925.0

You don't argue with yourself in there. ;)

Offline Vulmea

  • Almost saint-like.....
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,329
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #11 on: February 2, 2013, 05:13:07 pm »
The problem being that the crowd themselves are largely performance-motivated themselves, and as Boltersdorf says you only gain the commonality of belief in club and teammates through shared experience. It has interesting connotations for the growing idea that the fans need motivating too.

I'm not sure maybe I'm simply arguing for arguments sake - I'll have another go at articulating it

The crowd will be partly pefrormance related but increasingly I find myself being more concerned about the clubs reputation and status than individual results - I can admire a team which tries and fails in an individual game more than one that wins through luck.

its not so much that fans need 'motivating too' as the fans are part of the whole - a club identity is not just what happens on the pitch or at least I hope not and this is why I suggest you are talking about a more clinical passionless model (at least on the pitch ,one that is trained to ignore external factors rather than feed on them) - I think football will move further and further into the continental model - it'll be more and more a middle class, sanitised entertainment  - ok the model in and of itself does not sugggest this - but if you dont believe you are influencing the game - if you dont feel part of it - what is the point?

Tennis and Golf can be gripping entertainment, they dont need a crowd to stir the emotions although you could perphaps look at the diffference between the ryder cup and the open championship
 or Wimbledon and the Olympic final to see the difference when a crowd influences proceedings and players


I think Suarez (a troublesome Uruguayan with a unique playing style) has shown that there is no such thing as a 'Liverpool player' other than what loosely fits what we desire to see in our team at the time. Really any 'Liverpool player' is one that is playing to the level, and in the way, that we want. Performance-motivated players are more susceptible to 'bad form' and therefore times when they're not what we want in a 'Liverpool player'.

Also the arrogance that we're special, that 'we're Liverpool with Liverpool players' kind of steps dangerously into the Dunning-Kruger territory I mentioned. I see plenty of people say that those who accept certain bad performances are feeble, not of a Liverpool mentality, but the danger is that illusory superiority stops us from accurately evaluating (and improving) ourselves. I think it's Steve Peters who said that players reach about 85% of their performance level and think that they're doing great and lose that drive to improve i.e. when you think you're good you don't know how bad you are.

All in all though, as Roy says, I don't actually think we disagree. The problem may be that the theory disconnects you from the exciting end product on the pitch, whereas for me it's a happy marriage.

I'm not sure what you mean about Luis - it would be very intersting to hear Shanks's views on Luis personallly I think he'd have adored him - I think in part a Liverpool player used to be a player that had a certain quality  (he has that) but also one that understood the club and work ethic, the idea of everybody contributing and sharing the rewards (he has that) - it was and has been a difficult concept for millionaire footballers to keep going - it came with a certain humility were the club was more important (he has this too)  -  its also where the concept of the 12th man originated - the model you outline seems to call for only 11. The 12th man not only intimidated the opposition but lifted our players up, drove them on in the last 5 minutes of games, when systems failed and tactics let you down that extra belief and graft got you over the line not least because you believed it would and the opposition knew it would.


building something that does not depend on it makes sense, building something that doesn't use it when it is there, is foolish.

so the mental strength can come through a belief in the club and what it stands for as much as a system - our greatest strength has always been we are in it together to build   ystem that ignores that seems to be tantamount to heresy - now clearly I could be fooling myself, it could be that the 12th man is mythical and its never really made much difference but the romantic in me does not want to believe it - it may have been Milans complacency that turned the final rather than the haunting rendition of YNWA thankfully we'll never really know

in terms of 'being the best' you have first to believe you are- that does not have to translate as arrogance but simply as determination - in the 60's Liverpool was a very special place to be - partly because we believed it was and we made it happen, not just in football - the power of collective belief is a beautiful and sometimes dangerous thing -

now believing you are special and better than you are without justification is a problem - the idea we turn up and win because of a name is a nonsense - the idea we have any divine right to success is drivel - its the values that provide the belief in the first place that matter - in part that can be engendered by a system but to survive it needs to be bigger than that it needs an identity of its own - we are despite 20 years of underachievement one of the top ten clubs in world football - the City itself though well thats slipped an awful long way further- a genius like Shanks would struggle to get us back on the perch to do it we'll need all the advantages we can muster - our history and passion are two factors we can't ignore without them what would sepraate us from the herd?

anyway I'm rambling now and your post deserves better but England are caning Scotland........

The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate, contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.

John F. Kennedy/Shanklyboy.

Offline BreakfastPercy

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,381
  • Follow me: @BreakfastPercy
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #12 on: February 3, 2013, 04:11:02 am »
I think you're way overestimating the bond between the crowd and the players, and I don't think Barcelona, Dortund or United's exertion of control in the game leads to a disconnect with their fans.

I'm not sure what you mean about Luis - it would be very intersting to hear Shanks's views on Luis personallly I think he'd have adored him - I think in part a Liverpool player used to be a player that had a certain quality  (he has that) but also one that understood the club and work ethic, the idea of everybody contributing and sharing the rewards (he has that) - it was and has been a difficult concept for millionaire footballers to keep going - it came with a certain humility were the club was more important (he has this too)  -  its also where the concept of the 12th man originated - the model you outline seems to call for only 11. The 12th man not only intimidated the opposition but lifted our players up, drove them on in the last 5 minutes of games, when systems failed and tactics let you down that extra belief and graft got you over the line not least because you believed it would and the opposition knew it would.
How do you relate that to (for example) a Brazilian who has come via Italy? Where is the shared experience that helps him bond quickly with his teammates? What happens when a dip in performances makes him feel like he is falling short of a 'Liverpool player'* and starts the spiral we saw with Downing (it's still performance orientated as there's a prerequisite of quality)? How do you motivate a player who is self-interested (C. Ronaldo for example)? How do you continue to motivate a player who has achieved the criteria you've laid out?

*Some players may wish to avoid the 'weight of the shirt' notion altogether

Offline Vulmea

  • Almost saint-like.....
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,329
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #13 on: February 3, 2013, 01:41:43 pm »
I think you're way overestimating the bond between the crowd and the players, and I don't think Barcelona, Dortund or United's exertion of control in the game leads to a disconnect with their fans.
How do you relate that to (for example) a Brazilian who has come via Italy? Where is the shared experience that helps him bond quickly with his teammates? What happens when a dip in performances makes him feel like he is falling short of a 'Liverpool player'* and starts the spiral we saw with Downing (it's still performance orientated as there's a prerequisite of quality)? How do you motivate a player who is self-interested (C. Ronaldo for example)? How do you continue to motivate a player who has achieved the criteria you've laid out?

*Some players may wish to avoid the 'weight of the shirt' notion altogether

Its true I could be - Man United and Arsenal have virtually no resonance and have been successful, Chelsea well what can you say about them - but they are not us are they - they can use whatever model that fits for them.  If we are going to plan then should the intent be to use the advantage it potentially gives us or not

Benitez took a while but he used it well we overan better teams using the intimidation of the crowd and the adrenal burst it gave our players - we noticeably used the power of the crowd more on european games because it was so more tangible  - if you've experienced those european nights than you know there is an electricity in the air, an aura that anything is possible if we are suggesting the players ignore that then I'm suggesting that's not  a good  thing.

Does home advantage exist anymore - is it more about familiarity with their surroundings than support? Our home record under Kenny was abysmal - our 'support' achieved very little  it would appear - so does that mean the idea of a bastion of invincibility is old hat - the idea of the KKop sucking the ball in should be forgotten along with the standing Kop and rattles?

Shanks on the crowd

"These people are not simply fans, they're more like members of one extended family."

How do you relate it to a Brazilian who's come from Brazil or a Uruguayan via Holland or a young kid from Madrid - at times it seems those guys have understood more about being a 'Liverpool player' than players from closer to home. Maybe the aura of Liverpool remians bigger abroad than it does here.

well we can ask the big man himself about that can't we..........


"If I've got players on my books, I search into them to see what they are, what they are made of, and I can tell you within a month what he is. Whether he needs to get bollocked or needs to get encouraged or he needs to be shifted altogether."


"Fire in your belly comes from pride and passion in wearing the red shirt. We don't need to motivate players because each of them is responsible for the performance of the team as a whole. The status of Liverpool's players keeps them motivated."

We have lost our way and to regain it we may need to build a system, but it can't stop at a system they come and go with time, the club endures. Its principles need to be sound and stand the test of time but practices need to shift with the wind. Use a system and you may win the odd bit of silver, build a Club and the worlds your large crustacean.
The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate, contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.

John F. Kennedy/Shanklyboy.

Offline woof

  • Barking up the wrong tree.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,709
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #14 on: February 4, 2013, 08:15:58 am »
A bit cliched but everyone's an onion with many complex layers. Parallels can be drawn on football teams and players. We know that a player can be very skillful, works his socks off at training sessions but if mentally frail on match day, none of the things he possess and does matter.

Bloody good OP.

royhendo

  • Guest
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #15 on: February 4, 2013, 08:39:21 am »
I'd like to learn more about the approach taken with players. I don't think there's any debate over the value of being a grown up as soon as you can as a player. Mental strength and belief in winning are broadly bollocks - it's the absence of illusions as to what you are and aren't capable of that this approach seems to drive at - same as with Peters. It's not stripping emotion; if anything it's sharpening it - making it purer and less disconnected as a motivator. The same applies with Dokovic and Murray in tennis just now.

Offline L666KOP

  • Wants everyone to fuck off. Especially you. Yes YOU! Too Tender for Tinder. Would swallow his knob on a genuine fuck up.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,116
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #16 on: February 4, 2013, 08:55:29 am »
Unfortunately, I'm not 'qualified' to take part in this thread, but it makes fantastic reading.
 :)
13mins - Bournemouth have gone home. Utd kicked off anyway. Still 0-0 as Smalling passes it back to De Gea.

Offline okabandai

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 265
  • We all Live in a White and Red Kop
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #17 on: February 4, 2013, 09:19:27 am »
excellent post!

are these systems articles going to be publish into a book or something?

Quote
So, if Gervinho's adapted forehead is built to house an overactive frontal lobe, it may well explain why he consistently chokes when faced with whether to shoot, pass, or buy tassel-ties for his fringe.
:lmao :lmao :lmao
Mama is BOSS

Offline Adamski LFC

  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
  • Polymath, ... I think not
    • Dash Equestrian
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #18 on: February 4, 2013, 09:28:03 am »
I have read one Steve Peter's book and it is a very good allegory recognising not all emotion is helpful.  He talks about the fact that if you feel an emotion with no logical reason to feel it, it is not the human talking but the rabid emotional, intuitive inner being, he dubs the chimp.  The human in us still has emotions, but not the manic depressive extremities.

Interstingly, this reactionary response is what we see in players and posters.  The human is thoughful, considered, the knee-jerk is chimp.  The system, which inlcudes working hard, pride in the club and the shirt, leads to the human winning more, a true buffer from snide comments and bad media, so no surprises at the interviews from the players after talking with Steve.

The crowd do not provide a twelfth man BUT do activate a higher level of pride in the system, the club, the shirt and fans.  This higher level, however temporary can make a good player great, but then a bad crowd makes a good player, mediocre.  We cannot rely on the crowd so much as they can exhibit the reactionary response to a mistake.  Separate the player from these highs and lows and you can still have fire in your belly.  Massive fear, stupendous anger, huge frustration are all symptoms of the chimp.  Pride, Patience, and I guess Love, are all descruibed as virtuous and decidely human as not relying in the immediate here and now.

In summary, a truly stupdendous OP with some cracking follow ups, supremely well explained.  The system is not an emotioless machine, more a long term human project to build something you may have heard before, a bastion of invincibility.
Hoping not to embarrass oneself should not be the ultimate aim when posting

Offline exiledinyorkshire

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,699
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #19 on: February 4, 2013, 09:33:08 am »
"Interesting, but..."

Do you ever agree with an o.p. Vulmea?

Where does it say not to use emotion? It says it's good to get players to a stage where they're not reliant on it as a crutch, no? If you read BreakfastPercy's post there's nothing that contradicts the points you're making.

Contrary for the sake of being contrary.

As soon as i read Vulmea's post, i knew this was coming !! Ha Ha!

It really does set you up for struggling to read some of the excellent insight Vulmea has. I had an old work colleague that habitually started every conversation with a no. It made me want to throttle him, especially as 9 times out of 10 he agreed with you anyway. just wanted to start with a no to assert dominance.

its a fascinating thing all of its own.

And thats no disrespect to Vulmea becuase he's a clever chap and i respect what he says. Just a contrary twat most of the time.


Offline Gnurglan

  • The Swedish Savaloy
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 35,548
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #20 on: February 4, 2013, 09:33:44 am »
Henderson first...

"That's what I needed to get my head around the most: that I had to do it all the time, not just occasionally. When you come to a club like Liverpool you need to perform straight away and consistently. Looking back, I don't think I did that. There were games when I thought I'd played well. It just wasn't every single week and that isn't enough for a club like Liverpool. I needed to learn that."

On the Fulham thing in the summer.

"It wasn't a nice thing to hear. I didn't want to go anywhere. I wasn't playing regularly and they gave me the option if I wanted to go. I told them: 'No, I don't want to, I want to keep fighting for my place.' I came to Liverpool wanting to stay here for the rest of my career. I certainly didn't want to leave after a year."

"OK, it might not have gone to plan at the start, but I knew I could turn around and get it right. I knew I just had to take it on the chin. Even though I wasn't in the team, I felt that if I kept going, kept working hard, kept fighting, I would get my chance again, and that I would take it."



This is what I like the most about Henderson. People talk about his work rate etc, but it's his mentality which has impressed me the most. He understands what he needs to do, the level of expectation placed on him. He takes it in and he does something positive with it. He improves. It's difficult. If he'd listened too much to the critics, his confidence would have been shot to pieces. If he doesn't listen at all, it's easy to believe everything is great when it isn't.

And I believe Rodgers has done a good thing. He removed Henderson from the starting line up. Gave him some peace, some time to adjust, instead of playing him every week. So it's good stuff from both the player and the manager. And it seems it's working well.

I'd also like to add that mentality, that's what's so crucial about Sterling's development. People think it's just about playing and that Sterling should play every week. Because if 'he's good enough, he's old enough'. No.

Sterling (and other young players) haven't had to live with the pressure Henderson mentions. It's no longer OK to just get on the pitch. All of a sudden they have to deliver at a very high standard, every week. That's some change for them. If they can't (which is the natural thing), it's so easy to destroy their confidence. While I think Rodgers has handled for example Henderson, Suso and Wisdom well, I think he's gambled with Sterling. He needs to be much more careful from now on.

        * * * * * *


"The key isn't the system itself, but how the players adapt on the pitch. It doesn't matter if it's 4-3-3 or 4-4-2, it's the role of the players that counts." Rafa Benitez

Offline matthew45

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Kopite
  • ******
  • Posts: 797
  • Try hard blogger and embarrassed OOT
    • Matthew Cain's blog
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #21 on: February 4, 2013, 09:36:14 am »
The mentality point is also interesting to assess in retrospect. When you look at former Championship winning teams - Man United and Leeds for example - it appears as though far more players go on to be managers than the equivalent generation at Liverpool. Why are we so much better at making pundits than managers? I think footballing brain and mentality must be partly to do with this.
I blog about Liverpool, mostly focussed on the reserves, at: http://blog.matthewcain.co.uk/category/liverpool-fc/

Offline Adamski LFC

  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
  • Polymath, ... I think not
    • Dash Equestrian
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #22 on: February 4, 2013, 09:39:04 am »
I think the manager point is that these guys are trained to be driving for more, but after a hard 12 years at the footballing coalface, these easy option is punditry, an enormous desire to manage has to be present.
Hoping not to embarrass oneself should not be the ultimate aim when posting

Offline exiledinyorkshire

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,699
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #23 on: February 4, 2013, 09:39:07 am »
Breakfastpercy, thats a cracking post mate.

i actually need to read it again later, but real quality once again.

if i eventually understand enough i'll come back later.

Seems to me to tie in with some of the stuff you were doing on your website Roy.

Really great stuff.

Vulmea........ everybody likes a well done. Just start your posts with Great OP when its deserved and then rip the shit out of it, it would make you more likeable. These guys spend a lot of time constructing these posts, as indeed you must do too. Just give a little credit before you start arguing the toss about everything dude. :wave

Offline Chip Evans

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,619
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #24 on: February 4, 2013, 09:46:07 am »
Not sure I have the brain capacity or knowledge to reply to the excellent OP, or to most of this series, but I just wanted to say thanks.

This whole series has been up there with the best threads I've read on the board. Entertaining and educational, well researched and well written. More please.

The Gervinho and Owen's wife lines are doozies BreakfastPercy btw (now I have to try remove a Cheerio from a nostril) :thumbup

Offline Dr_Evil

  • Anny Roader
  • ****
  • Posts: 410
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #25 on: February 4, 2013, 10:05:54 am »
Another fantastic OP...latest in a series of such.
Holy fuck lads I got family home. My computer isn't at a hidden place in the house. They saw the penis.

Offline exiledinyorkshire

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,699
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #26 on: February 4, 2013, 10:16:00 am »
"From generation to generation, the strength drawn by players from a conceptually defined System has both reflected and improved their ability to employ that System. Many noticed the weary legs of Barcelona’s players in the Spanish team of Euro 2012, nearly as many derided them as ‘boring’, and yet they drew strength from their footballing principles, stuck to their ‘superior’ form of football, and ultimately it was a crutch to their victory. It’s a notion not uncommon in politics, religion, and many other walks of life, but fighting for the ‘greater good’ is not something given much credence in football. Yet as teams willing to buy into brave footballing ideologies have consistently shown for decades, the benefits of playing for a ‘higher purpose’, something more than the pragmatic, are very real."

That sums us up doesnt it? Thats whats always felt different about us, its our kind of uniqueness, "the liverpool way". Utd now have it, and i suppose always did to a lesser extent. Its just that for 20 years we've had that feeling about ourselves, without a manifestation on the actual playing surface. Its why Rodgers is so refreshing, he's buying into all the mythological Liverpool way stuff, and trying to add a the difference onto the pitch. I think all the managers up until this point have paid lip service to the Liverpool way, but fundemetally missed the point, we always played high possesion patient passing football. What happened was we lost our style and for some reason havent tried to reinvent it until 2012.

The system had to be re-installed by American owners who looked at it with fresh eyes and thought hang on shouldnt we be a bit more like this, isnt this what everybody remembers liverpool for. The system, the greater good. Even if short term we look a bit shit.

The Bootroom, culminating in Kenny had a playing manifestation of the Liverpool way. (incidentally latterly i have started to  think Kenny actually didnt understand it that well, and how could he he was a novice when he took the managers job first time round). Roy evens understood it, But just didnt make it win a title quick enough. And then we got Ged. And that was the end of the Liverpool way in real terms. Although briefly Souness destroyed as much as he could.

But now we are back where we should have been in 96 97. And i'm happier for it. We werent patient enough the first time, but now we have to be.

Back in those days we still had players around the club who had been here for the success, Barnes Beardsley Rush Molby, they were system acclimatised, they were part of the winning "Borg" its so much more difficult now because nobody has come anywhere near a title. If rodgers had come into that club, i genuinely feel it would have been 2 years for a title. Now who knows, the mental strength in the playing staff has to come from within themselves for the time being, they can draw a little more from each collective step forward, but there is no collective memory to fall back on yet.

Its all about the quality of the players mentaly and technically though at the end of the day.

If you have the cash, you can go and buy a team to win a title, if you dont then how do you do it? And thats where You really have to give rodgers massive credit, He's taken that job on. He really must have some belief in his on ability. He knows that his system can over achieve on the quality of the playing staff available. he knows it, and as the months tick by and he improves the overall quality of the group, i think they will start to assinilate to the system more and more.

Massive ramble, not sure if i've really added anything, but stopped me working for an hour this morning so cant be bad.




Offline Malaysian Kopite

  • Feels shivers when he looks a Trquarista's...
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 11,040
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #27 on: February 4, 2013, 10:24:44 am »
Owen's wife :lmao

Excellent OP and the two posts by Royhendo. I'll have to read the rest later.
Football without fans is nothing.

We've won 18 titles, 5 European Cups, 7 FA Cups, but today must be the greatest victory of all.

Offline exiledinyorkshire

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,699
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #28 on: February 4, 2013, 10:28:37 am »
"“Interests shown on the basis of common life occurrences (reduce success dependence). It's no secret that family life plays a big role with many footballers. By saying: ‘People, let's play today so that our children are proud of us.' That grabs everyone, because the children and the family have a meaning. That's a real reason for performance. And it emphasizes the commonality.”


having worked a lot with youth players, i seem to recall from the documentary, that Rodgers said a lot about making their parents proud.

Actually Kenny siad that over and over again. Always about being a credit to their famalies.


Offline Phil M

  • YNWA
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 58,982
  • Bravery is believing in yourself" Rafael Benitez
    • I coulda been a contenda.....
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #29 on: February 4, 2013, 10:33:13 am »
Excellent work fellows.
It's true to say that if Shankly had told us to invade Poland we'd be queuing up 10 deep all the way from Anfield to the Pier Head.

Offline Harinder

  • RAWK Star. Top Kharbooja. Heat-Sikhing Missile Launcher. Purveyor of burning bushes, interpreter of dreams, provider of Egyptian travel before the age of 30, and saviour of RAWK. Also he has a beard.
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 7,703
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #30 on: February 4, 2013, 10:45:55 am »
I love this thread and the quality of the OP.

Rewind one year nearly and He's Big He's Red tried something similar but on the lines of leadership on the pitch.

Classic DISC (Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, Conscientiousness). Used by Goldman Sachs back in 2001 and possibly earlier as well as later to apply people to Situational Leadership models. People have different characteristics. At different times there are different needs. We all exhibit certain traits that mean we react in a somewhat prescriptive manner to what is presented to us. Lets add to this the aspects of Fear, Greed, Panic and Mania... all things exhibited by our beloved community here in RAWK and by the free markets (from the stock exchanges through to sodding Ebay!).

Applying some of the above against managers in our present and past shows probably how and why certain players reacted well and others badly to change. If Rafa managed the likes of say Phil Babb (anecdotal example btw) we know that he'd have lasted an almighty 5 mins against our great Spaniard.

In my opinion, as humble as it may be, King Kenny is a master of Dominance and Influence. We saw this back in the eighties on and off the pitch and we see it now too. The issue, and it is one no matter how we try and hide it, is that players follow situational leadership really well or really badly. They're not in between. This is as follows



Most players, if asked, would say they are D4's. Highly competent and highly committed. They'd all probably agree they aren't Lionel Messi too so from that you can see they lie when the question is in relation to committment and competence - they'll never say they are shit.

Mentors need to be D4's. Not all of our senior players are. When we look at it in a cold and clinical way the 2 groups that show a high committment are either really competent or at the other end of the spectrum. This means that as form or ability drops a committed and competent player will falter so cannot be a truly good mentor. The player will either look to prolong themselves by hook or crook or will look to take notice of the changes and provide a different stewardship.

Kenny Dalglish is a truly amazing manager. From his time as Player Manager through to hanging up his boots and concentrating on the management duties he understood how to transition and transform his role. I can't think of many examples of people who've been as capable.

One only needs to look at Chelsea to see how bad it can get when self realisation isn't there

So Stevie and Carra. In my opinion Stevie G is a captain. HE is a leader. Chips down, shit against us, he's who we need. As fear and mania cause the Panic, we look to stabilisers. He's the stabiliser for better or for worse.

He's also human. There are times when he falters, either a mistake on the pitch or incorrect decision. The thing is that it's not consistent.

Carra. Can be a leader. Shit against us and he's not a stabiliser any more. Those around him have progressed and learnt to become immune to the direction or the retort. Carra is a mentor. Just maybe not one for the pitch anymore. I cannot for a single second believe that he really is about himself and not the club. Under Rafa's stewardship it was the mantra. It's the team not the individual.

Again, he's also human. The brain says do a defensive action and the legs cannot get him there fast enough.

Where does this leave the current team then? One only needs to look at the central defensive partnership of Agger and Skrtel. Both highly competent as well as committed. In my mind they're mentors to our young defenders and anyone for that matter. They came when their influence was not the strongest and shown by sheer grit and determination what is achievable. Lucas also.

Who needs mentoring therefore? Whether they like it or not the likes of Downing and Adam for sure. Carroll I assume already knows this and one can only presume that one is there on and off the pitch for him. They sit in D2/D3 territory and it's a dangerous one of peaks and troughs. Our youthful squad members or those looking to push through need to be brought into the squad, gel and then play. I found it really reassuring to see Raheem out training pre-match with the starting 11. It makes me believe that at the core of our club we want to do this.

A question: What does commitment and competence mean, in the framework of football and leadership in general?

Committment. In the most simplest manner playing to win or playing to ensure the very best performance for the cause of the club (usually to win said match or provide others with the capability to)
Competence. The possession of ability to ensure you deliver the very best in association to that committment.

Competence though in footballing terms is a huge thing. One mans Messi can be another mans Joe Cole. To be black and white about competence means we remove the "do a job" aspect. We look at it in as pure a sense as possible. Is this person at the very best level in relation to their peers for the role they perform?

In business there aren't a lot of D4's either. And thats actually ok. If everyone was a leader straight away how would anyone grow into something? A good example of this is where you have lower competence but really high committment. Usually this kind of person will be loyal and follow a path laid out for him/her. In my mind this would be a youth player. The traits to achieve greatness (D4) are there and you feel they can be nurtured into this.

Identifying when nurture is no longer possible is when they get moved on. Just like football really. When you feel you cannot develop or progress someone they get moved on. More bluntly if you perform and grow then stay. If you can no longer perform but can grow into something else then stay. If you can't perform, cannot grow or cannot develop then leave.

The best player manager ever in my opinion was Kenny for this very aspect of the ability to grow into something else. Phil Neal really wanted the role from recollection of autobiographies but didn't get it. He was out captain way back when. A leader. A driver. A legend. But not a grower.

Committment is linked to a cause. If we said that clause was The Liverpool Way we could have an endless debate on what that actually means. However in my opinion it's not a case of that right here right now. A simple cause that any footballer would agree with is to win a match when playing. With that premise in mind how many squad members could stand up and be counted as knowing they can provide what's needed to achieve that? Oh. Without their ego getting in the way?

We all have opinions on who's good and who's bad. Personally for what it's worth my opinion thinks that the club has clued on to succession management early. We have old players who will either move or be moved on. We have some that won't and we may not agree with it. Only time will tell. A few seasons ago we would have willingly shifted on Lucas or Skrtel. Some may feel that now about the new crop. I may feel that now about Charlie Adam. I just might not be right. The great thing about that model of D1 to D4 is that once you plateau it becomes very easy to spot. Capello did it to Medal Thief. Just Medal Thief has too much self belief to get it.

Didi Hamman nails some of this in his autobiography where he talks of the German team versus England. A team against a collection of individuals. Mentoring younger players so they don't make the same mistakes in matches.

The England squad is full of individuals afraid of being moved on. I doubt we'll ever see Rio or JT pass up their desired positions for a younger and possibly better scoped player because they haven't got the heart to do so. For what it's worth I don't think ive seem Carra ever do that. Moan about not playing or not being picked or making it deliberately harder for a successor to come in. Others may opine differently but has he attacked losing out to Skrtel? No. Should he be Skrtel's mentor? No again. Competency wise it's a bad match. Carra woud excel though with youth players.

Gotta hit the sack now but this debate on RAWK has been a long time coming if we don't deviate or derail into a player hate/ witch hunt. We all love our club and we should be able to look at where a team member needs growth/support. If I recall the Back, not barrack, Henderson and he will blossom at Anfield thread the title had the right tone.
Just clicked on the main board and my virus scanner came back with this

"When we visited this site, we found it exhibited one or more risky behaviors."


:lmao

Strip his knighthood https://submissions.epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/47770

Offline Adamski LFC

  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
  • Polymath, ... I think not
    • Dash Equestrian
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #31 on: February 4, 2013, 10:58:01 am »
How well you systematise this 'graduation from dependence' dictates in large part how sustainable your success is going to be. So in the Ferguson article, he betrays how he does the same - he bakes 'something bigger than the individual' into the mix. Ferguson redefines 'talent'. He says, "“I tell them that hard work is a talent, too. They need to work harder than anyone else. And if they can no longer bring the discipline that we ask for here at United, they are out. I am only interested in players who really want to play for United, and who, like me, are ‘bad losers’.” Hard work is talent. Hard work is 'for United'.

Roy

Another book I have read called: Bounce: The myth of Talent by Matthew Syed, a former British and European Table Tennis Champion.  In it he talks about the most talented people we see in life, the Williams Sisters, Tiger Woods, Mozart and others.  He talks about how in the early life all these people had immense practice early on.  Even Mozart started playing the piano aged 1 or 2 and played it incessantly giving him immense practice.  Early on Hard Work is what is seen at the ages of 7, 8, or 9 as Talent.  Scienitific projects have proved the link between early years and practice saying 10,000 hours of progressive training produce talent.

Now studies on footballers are myriad.  What we know about educated/trained footballers get better, when all else is equal, the more they practice the systems and age.  Some players come late to supremacy, where they have the mercurial talent, but aren't aligned with the system, it takes a move for them to gel.  Some players plateau, and what advances them then is the tactical knowledge in the system to bring dimensions to their game.

Bearing all this in mind, getting young players to believe in the system, gives them a sense of shared ownership and collective responsiblity and isolates them from other reactionary responses.  Getting senior players to believe in the system may give them more worth in their own eyes, their footballing CV improves as does then their performance.  As stated above arrogance diminishes skills, so subverting Gerrard to still be Captain Fantastic, but within rather than a marauding midfielder with an eye for goal.  It is no surprise that as Gerrard learns to understand what the system wants from him, he can flourish even at his age.  His last two goals remind us of the Gerrard of old, but it doesn't disrupt the team and more importantly the system.
Hoping not to embarrass oneself should not be the ultimate aim when posting

Offline DanA

  • misses the Eurovision Glory Days.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 12,127
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #32 on: February 4, 2013, 11:08:26 am »
I think home advantage doesn't come so much from the emotional response of the home teams players but rather the away. For me emotion for a player is not real. Practice is real, skill is real, concentration, strength and fitness are real. Emotion in my experience it's a distraction.


The Liverpool way I think is an ethos towards building habits, professional behavior but also the mental steal to block out emotion, deal with the distraction. The crowd at Anfield is magnificent weapon, something almost unique. IMO it's powerful not because it drives our players on but rather it tests our opponents. To make it at Liverpool players quickly need to come to grips with the crowd, they a forged in the fire of Anfield's crowd week in week out.  Liverpool players IMO learn early to acknowledge and appreciate the crowd but not ruled by it or his emotions.  A lesson many of our opponents are forced to face (on a different level) when they meet us, particularly on those famous European nights. And it's emotion that gives us an edge.
« Last Edit: February 4, 2013, 11:10:42 am by DanA »
Quote from: hinesy
He hadn't played as if he was on fire, more the slight breeze cutting across New Brighton on a summer's day than El Nino, the force of nature.

Offline Hinesy

  • RAWK Editor. Giving it BAFTA’s. 57'sy. Caramel log dealer and comma chameleon. Tory Totty Tonguer
  • RAWK Staff.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 20,311
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #33 on: February 4, 2013, 11:46:06 am »
Good read BP mate, really good. I'd like to ask you what do you think about what you've written? Do you have an opinion about the 'system and use of arrogance'? Is your post more about your view of how Rodgers might proceed? Or is it about system over club 'tradition' is the way to go? The reason I ask is that several of the above posts have talked about the variable extra intangible factors that clubs have: reputation, crowd, tradition, media expectation, opponent expectation and so on and I wonder if you're saying we need more arrogance, or more confidence or that, as your title suggest, the mind needs a system..?
Yep.

Offline redmark

  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,395
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #34 on: February 4, 2013, 12:26:15 pm »
Fascinating subject, and an illuminating OP.

A quick comment/question (edit: ha! not so quick) on a subsequent point raised (specifically about Downing last year, but, I think, more general):

That's pertinent to Downing who at times last season tried hard, still performed badly, and within that paradox is criticized as not trying which effects him worse and doesn't reflect reality.

After the Oldham game the players seemed to accept that they didn't fight enough, and so Rodgers' criticism is really effective if our they're not completely performance motivated. I think in light of that, some of the controversy caused by Rodgers comments was justified, because of the way footballs always been. In hindsight though, this is where Steve Peters could really be earning his crust.

I remember thinking early last season that Downing was playing pretty well - sort of like he is now; tidy, hard working, occasionally threatening but overall, good useful 'team' play. But there was an undercurrent it seemed in the media that he had zero goals, zero assists. Then there were a couple of games where he seemed to get 'selfish' and was trying too hard to score, specifically, and appearing to get down on himself - for himself - when Carroll or Suarez missed a 'chance' that he had 'created', robbing him of an assist.

In terms of the OP here, this stuff shouldn't really have mattered - Downing was playing quite well. He was contributing; the team were doing reasonably well in that period, in a 'new' manager's first full season. Was this because Downing was dependent on performance driven motivation? I'm not so sure.

"as Boltersdorf says you only gain the commonality of belief in club and teammates through shared experience"

I'm not sure Downing felt like a Liverpool player; that he felt part of a collective working together in a defined system toward a commonly understood goal. Thus decent performances mattered less than the headline stats which informed his real 'peers' at that time: not his Liverpool teammates, but international squad members, the 'SoccerAM-twitter-social media' football circus that tittered at his lack of production. If he'd been a settled, valued (and perhaps, proven valuable) member of the team - I'm tempted to say "group", which I'll probably come back to - I think he may have been more resilient to those 'external' pressures and more secure in his contribution.

This raises a question about Dalglish, for me - coming back to a point about Rodgers. Hopefully we're permitted at this point to discuss his managerial strengths and weaknesses rationally (as we did in the 80s, when he certainly had a few weaknesses to address). Essentially, his 80's side involved slotting great signings into a side which already contained great players (Hansen and Whelan, for example) who had done and won everything. The club and coaching structure was as it had been for a decade or more, built soundly on Shankly-Paisley foundations. Players coming in knew very well who Dalglish was and what sort of player he had been. They'd grown up with him. Hansen and Whelan told them how things were, past, present and future.

"as Boltersdorf says you only gain the commonality of belief in club and teammates through shared experience"

Dalglish's 21st century team had none of this; and in retrospect, I don't think Dalglish knew how to instill it from scratch. It was something he was fundamentally part of and perhaps couldn't understand how it wasn't for others, or how to communicate it to them. To Beardsley and Barnes and Aldridge, he didn't have to say much: just look around. Two years ago, the club was in turmoil and almost internal civil war. Important senior players like Hyypia and Alonso had gone. Carragher and Gerrard - even ignoring the conspiracy theories - couldn't compensate; Carragher a declining footballing force, Gerrard struggling with injuries and suddenly, traumatically separated from his footballing soulmate days into Dalglish's reign.

Where was I? Why should Downing, or Henderson, or Carroll, or Adam, be expected to "get" and "fit" the "Liverpool Way"? It didn't exist. It hadn't existed for 20 years; and the return of the last manager to remember it didn't guarantee that he could revive it - because he was it's most glorious product, not it's creator. Expecting Dalglish to recreate the Liverpool Way in 2011 was like expecting a conductor to rewrite Tchaikovsky; or the Pope to repaint the Cistine Chapel.

"as Boltersdorf says you only gain the commonality of belief in club and teammates through shared experience"

Dalglish's shared experience was with Paisley, Fagan, Moran, Hansen, Whelan, Souness and Rush; passed on to Barnes, Beardsley, McMahon. He had no shared experience with Jordan Henderson or Stewart Downing. Gerrard and Carragher may have had an inkling of the Liverpool Way and a little recent success through Rafa, but two years ago were inconveniently at exactly the wrong moment to assist bridging the disparate experiences of Kenny Dalglish and Charlie Adam. Dalglish encouraged his players to go and be themselves; not realising himself that it was only the structure of the Liverpool he played in and inherited, that was perfectly designed to enhance and exploit brilliant individuals, in a system of supreme collective belief and arrogance.


The OP:
Browse the Brendan Rodgers gift shop, and you’ll find plenty of mugs, coasters, and Sergio Georgini jackets adorned with his famous slogan ‘you train dogs, I like to educate players’. It’s a trite little expression, and has only encouraged those who claim he’s a chancer in a simple game. But that’s football, and the modern ‘Head Coach’ gets less slack than John Terry’s sex leash. It’s a mindset predicated on the basis that it is the fans who are to be convinced by the 'philosophy', the fans who must be secure in the 'System', and of course us fans aren't impressed because we've seen it all before.

What’s sometimes lost is that the players haven't seen it all before.



Is brilliantly put; and something that ultimately, Dalglish didn't or couldn't get or transmit. For Dalglish, the players had to simply understand the fans and the club and the history, because Dalglish simply couldn't forget the fans and the club and the history; he is part of it.

Rodgers isn't, but he seems to understand it. Yes, we all wince slightly at what appears to be his invention of the passing game, or explaining 'resting with the ball' to 40-something year old fans who understood it before they were teenagers. But his players don't (necessarily) get it. There's a different emphasis even for those who were here under Rafa; it's a different planet for players like Downing and Henderson. What can be viewed (if one wants) as trite and patronising by fans is actually a bridge between players and fans, by educating the former (and indeed, some of the latter). And despite the 'David Brent' comparisons, he's managing it more succinctly and eloquently than the complex-simplicity of statements such as 'the Liverpool way' or 'a Liverpool player' we see fans resorting to.
 

Anyway. Downing - and anyone else. We can't expect them to play like 'Liverpool players' until they feel like 'Liverpool players' and have some idea what that means to us. Just because we were born to it and lived through it two or three decades ago doesn't mean they know what it is. It needs defining, and reinforcing, and defending - and the players need to feel part of it; valuable and valued. My ears have winced at it once or twice, but long live "the group".
Stop whining : https://spiritofshankly.com/ : https://thefsa.org.uk/join/ : https://reclaimourgame.com/
The focus now should not be on who the owners are, but limits on what owners can do without formal supporter agreement. At all clubs.

royhendo

  • Guest
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #35 on: February 4, 2013, 12:47:41 pm »
Good read BP mate, really good. I'd like to ask you what do you think about what you've written? Do you have an opinion about the 'system and use of arrogance'? Is your post more about your view of how Rodgers might proceed? Or is it about system over club 'tradition' is the way to go? The reason I ask is that several of the above posts have talked about the variable extra intangible factors that clubs have: reputation, crowd, tradition, media expectation, opponent expectation and so on and I wonder if you're saying we need more arrogance, or more confidence or that, as your title suggest, the mind needs a system..?

Another person elsewhere commented this morning (after reading the o.p.) that it touches upon the notion of The Liverpool Way and its nature going forward. Interesting questions there Sir.

Offline redmark

  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,395
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #36 on: February 4, 2013, 01:25:39 pm »
The human is thoughful, considered, the knee-jerk is chimp.

In keeping with the Round Table series for the humans, perhaps the raw post-match threads should be renamed Chimp's Tea Parties.
Stop whining : https://spiritofshankly.com/ : https://thefsa.org.uk/join/ : https://reclaimourgame.com/
The focus now should not be on who the owners are, but limits on what owners can do without formal supporter agreement. At all clubs.

Online kcbworth

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 7,158
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #37 on: February 4, 2013, 01:33:27 pm »
The thing that baffles me about the exent of Manchester Utds success over the past couple of decades is that they don't seem to eschew this whatsoever. They must, because no matter who they have in their squad, or how good their team is, they continue to get results, but there just doesn't seem to be much sophistication to it. Personally there are very few title winning Man Utd teams that have truly impressed me.

That's a fantastic OP and hopefully a great representation of a modernised Liverpool way - an approach to take us onwards and upwards.

Offline Harinder

  • RAWK Star. Top Kharbooja. Heat-Sikhing Missile Launcher. Purveyor of burning bushes, interpreter of dreams, provider of Egyptian travel before the age of 30, and saviour of RAWK. Also he has a beard.
  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 7,703
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #38 on: February 4, 2013, 01:51:30 pm »
In keeping with the Round Table series for the humans, perhaps the raw post-match threads should be renamed Chimp's Tea Parties.

:lmao

That is actually a great reflection of Steve Peter's book and wouldn't be too far off.

One thing I'd love to get the perspective of is what was done to build mental fortitude in the Shankly/Paisley era? They had the boot room advancements of profiling players and injuries etc but it would be hard to believe nothing existed for the mental side?

The mental coaching side itself is not a new phenomenon. It may appear to be in respect to the books and popularity as well as its proliferation in the media when accounting for sporting success but it's been ticking along for some time.
Just clicked on the main board and my virus scanner came back with this

"When we visited this site, we found it exhibited one or more risky behaviors."


:lmao

Strip his knighthood https://submissions.epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/47770

Offline Adamski LFC

  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
  • Polymath, ... I think not
    • Dash Equestrian
Re: Systems - Mindgames
« Reply #39 on: February 4, 2013, 02:46:51 pm »
I am sure others have more knowledge than me, but here I go with my tuppence!

I think the indoctrination of the Liverpool way was the 'system' that the players were all sold on.  Espouse the Liverpool Way and you can walk tall, have pride in playing for the club, and earn respect from the fans.  This 'Bastion of Invincibility' is key to this, this gives the individual to be subsumed behind this wall.  The belief in the way, the wall, the life and the family was the system I think that applied to players.

That great story about Dr Steve Peters sitting next to Ronnie O'Sullivan's 5 year old son when his dad was going for his first title;

The son turns to Dr S.P. and whispers, "That's my daddy there".  Now daddy hears this and thinks, 'this is only another shot in another game of snooker', pots the black and wins the tournament.

For non team sports make sure you make the children proud, for team sports make you club, the way AND your family proud.

That's what I think anyway...
Hoping not to embarrass oneself should not be the ultimate aim when posting