Topic: Not being Barca

[Vulmea]

I am not a fan of german football, the way they play is too much organised for my liking, but there is always something to learn from as they analyse the game itself in such a detailed way compared to english football. And I am not so sure if this approach would work in England though as the pace is much higher in England anyway. Dortmund came out special in Germany cause the other teams simply donīt play that high pace football.

Steve - I cant really speak about the actual football - I see a few teams in europe and the occasional bits of games elsewhere but the structure surely that is someting to be admired

- biggest crowds,  fans ownership, not in the pockets of the TV ?

Something i've wondered for a number of years now, in any discussion of how we should play people always bring up historic barca and ajax sides, great successful sides with a distinct playstyle but none of our own fans ever suggest our own great teams of the past as a base for a great playstyle. Why is this ?
 

It is curious and I'm wondering whether its because we were more adaptable than those sides - we did have an ability to mix up our play making it less easy for the purists to identify and categorise - Keegan and Toshack were a different set up to Rush and Dalglish to Barnes, Aldo and Beardsley -sure there was commonality - we had ideas but we also had the intelligence not to be too precious in our style - it was a more eclectic 'style' and thats also possibly were the struggle comes from today. The Milan side was drilled and rilled and drilled again, if teh ball is in X, then you are at Y. The Ajax side had a freedom of expression but almost a complusion to play a certian way (much as Barca now). I think Liverpool sides have been more pragmatic especially when it comes to domestic and european football for example switching from bludgeoning sides at Anfield to one up front cat and mouse in europe.

There are two ways to look at it though - one would be, shit the players are just being sent out with no plan , the other they are being taught to think and come up with their own
plans. Much as I detested our performance second half againt City at their place in the league cup - we had to have been drilled in that defensive display, we've played better in other games against the top 6 especially at Anfield I dont think thats just chance - we've looked organised for the most part, if anything we've lacked ambition.

Dalglish's style of communicating can make it seem like he's a hands off manager - just let the lads get on with it - it may be true, Clarke may be organising us defensively and the attacking play just left to its own devices - or it could be like tying your kids shoes everyday or teaching them to tie their own - Dalglish has always trusted his players - sometimes it doesn't work and they let him down, sometimes it works magnificently.  Maybe Carrolls just learned to tie his shoes properly.

The main problem for me with Kenny is not the style of play its the mental side and why we've failed to turn up in some games and why we look so fragile in others. Whatver plan you are supposed to be implementing if your head is not right its not going to work. Now this could be a result of the players own confusion, it could be the result of players convincing themselves they had nothing to play for it could be something else entirely but in each case its down to kenny to fix it.

If one of our strengths is to be variety, teams not knowing how we will come at them then its also going to be more difficult for us to spot.

I am puzzled by people who are sayingt hat we should not play like Barcelona etc etc

So IMHO we need to get back to our traditions and play pass and move. We do not have to play tiki taka a la Barcelona but we can play our own brand of pass and move. The more direct option is still available to us but we need to play our default mode as pass and move.

I find most of this entirely too negative and too black and white. The discussion has ranged from the differences in leagues, to those of the players, from where we are currently as a club to where we want to be.

If we are going to play 'pass and move' and we will - what form will it take - even Arsenal looked better when they had the option to play the ball to Adebayor in the air, they are a step up in quality from Swansea, capable of beating Barca playing football and yet they haven't won anything in 6 years despite this season having the most prolific striker in the league - and btw being completely outplayed by Liverpool at Anfield - if even the myopic Wenger says so then thats good enough for me and should be for you too - the main accusation labelled at Arsenal no plan B.  We've ruled out just trying to play even faster than Barca  making it 'tik tak' because it wont work. So exactly what will and why?

[The 92A]

Steve, this has already been moved onto the naughty step. I'm glad of that, it's somewhere to have a sly chat. It's impossible out there. But in a way it's a shame this is hidden. And it would be good if some other people found their way here, but if we start going on about player power it'll probably just get locked all together. So, I'll just say, that's probably my biggest concern about where our club is headed. It really does look like the tail's wagging the dog, though.

Leo, one thing this isn't is the naughty step. It's here for the complete opposite reason, the quality of the thread. Opinion puts the OP straight to the top of the front page, admittedly were often not used to coming over here but we're going to do this more often to the better threads. 

[steveeastend]

Steve - I cant really speak about the actual football - I see a few teams in europe and the occasional bits of games elsewhere but the structure surely that is someting to be admired

- biggest crowds,  fans ownership, not in the pockets of the TV ?
 

The fan ownership isnīt like everybody around here thinks to be that romantic. In fact, the fans have little to no say and itīs the big money people running the clubs and keeping them alive as well. Toennies (big sausage manufacturer) at Schalke, SAP owner-Hoffenheim, south german industry at Bayern, Wolfsburg-VW, Leverkusen-Bayer, some suggardaddies at Hamburg etc.

The only clubs being more or less owner driven and still being some sort of competitive at the top is Werder Bremen and probably Dortmund at the moment but they are quoted to be constantly complaining how hard it is to survive in this money driven football business as they cannot pay the same wages and fees as clubs like Hoffenheim, Wolfsburg and Bayern.

The crowd numbers are pretty impressive but as ticket prices are pretty low they are not making big money from matchday revenues with the exception of Bayern, Schalke and Dortmund.

So it will be Bayern only being able to play an important role CL wise on a regular basis.

Like Thomas Helmer said last weekend... if an english club wants a player, all german clubs with the exception of Bayern would just happily sell over value.

We've ruled out just trying to play even faster than Barca  making it 'tik tak' because it wont work. So exactly what will and why?

Itīs the players mate. With better players it would work. Maybe not on a Barca level but way better than it did this season. The likes of Lewandowski, Kakawa or Kuba at Dortmund, Song, Rosicky or van Persie are head and shoulders above Downing, Enrique, Henderson in terms of game intelligence and technique on the highest possible pace.  We made the biggest mistake last summer and the one before, itīs really that simple. The reasons for these mistakes probably not so (simple).

[Fat Scouser]

Leo, one thing this isn't is the naughty step. It's here for the complete opposite reason, the quality of the thread. Opinion puts the OP straight to the top of the front page, admittedly were often not used to coming over here but we're going to do this more often to the better threads. 

Like I said Albie, I'm glad it's over here so we can chat on the sly, while the kids are playing up in the other room. But nobody knows it's here now. So, we'll all end up baby sitting again, anyway.

[Fat Scouser]

The fan ownership isnīt like everybody around here thinks to be that romantic.

I always thought the Own Liverpool malarkey was nonsense. It was just undoable, and if SOS would have got the power they wanted... oh dear, indeed. But there has to be something better than what we've got here. Maybe the play rules might help. I really don't know.

[steveeastend]

I always thought the Own Liverpool malarkey was nonsense. It was just undoable, and if SOS would have got the power they wanted... oh dear, indeed. But there has to be something better than what we've got here. Maybe the play rules might help. I really don't know.

In germany, the DoF and manager(coach) structure has a long history and there is really not so much to say about it other than just finding the right people. The wrong ones would destroy a club if the owners wonīt step in early enough. Dortmund has been almost erased by Meier (DoF), 1860 as well (I forgot the name of this DoF responsible, he commited suicide a couple of years later), Hertha Berlin (Preetz)...the list is endless where DoFs guided clubs into a dangerous corner where it took years for those clubs to recover.

On the other hand, it could work just fine like in Hannover (Schmadkte-DoF, Slomka-Manager).

Personally, I donīt think the DoF structure would work here for a number of reasons, one would be that there is just too much politics going on at our club.

[RyanBabel19]

No mate, there's plenty of us who'd be happy to go back to our own old ways. Kenny's "Better Than Brazil" sides way of playing, would do for me.

What bothers me is, we seem ruderless. There seems to be no identifiable system. We don't seem to be heading for anything. It reminds of playing Sunday League. Fat and old or not, I still remember playing. I've played for some good sides at that level. We had some great players. We used to turn up every week, go in our positions and just go out an play. Then we'd have a kick about in midweek for training. I'm sure Kenny and Clarke do more than that, but it's not showing.

I'm out there constantly bollocking people when they take snide digs at Kenny. I've just been at it again. It's disgraceful what some of the shites on here come out with. But I don't see the problem in having a proper discussion on our clubs tactics. Well, no. There is a problem... I don't see any style of play to discuss.

I know we've had lots of injuries. I know we've had to make do and mend all season. But so have other sides. Put it this way... when Arsenal lose a couple of players, they don't start lumping it long. They stick to their system. We don't appear to have a system. And to me, that's the most worrying thing about this season.

I know it takes time. I've spent months preaching on how succesful teams are built by new managers... some good cup runs, maybe a win, a steady improvement in the league, a challenge or two and hopefully champions within 5 years. And, to the best of my knowledge, that's true.

I know there's flash in the pan sides that win titles with money, but if the money dries up, they don't stay around for long and they don't come along too often, either. Kenny's Blackburn was the last. Even the mega rich have to build towards being Champions and staying there. And it's getting harder and harder to compete with less money than the others. So, obviously, that's were boxing clever comes into play. An edge has to be found, a way of doing things that can level the feild. I can't see us doing anything to give us that edge. In harsh truth, like I've just said, I can't see us doing anything above amatuer level... "Get out there, and get stuck in."

I don't know. Maybe it's just me. Maybe I'm too thick to see what we're aiming for. I have no problem with that. In fact, I wish someone could tell me what a gobshite I am for not seeing what we're trying to do.

Don't get me wrong i agree with every word of this, its been one of my biggest issues with us this season but it till doesn't address my question.

I believe many would be in the same boat as you and would love to see us go back to that but my point is why is it never actually suggested ? I'm just interested as to why its rarely ever brought up in fine detail like other teams tactics are, again i'm not old enough to have seen these sides in action on a weekly basis so i don't really know what the inner workings of their set ups were like i do many of the more recent sides but surely they had something good going the way people talk about the football we played and given how much success it brought.

Its just something i've always found odd. People want us to have our own identity and play our own brand of football but its as if we've NEVER had our own distinct tactical style that brought success and people always look to other teams history as opposed to our own for a liverpool style of play. Just baffles me. I'm not saying copy it point for point, the game has changed since then, but surely it can most certainly be used as a base to build upon.

[Fat Scouser]

Don't get me wrong i agree with every word of this, its been one of my biggest issues with us this season but it till doesn't address my question.

No. There's plenty of us who talk about the old days, the teams and players we've seen. In fact, most of us over 50 do nothing but that. And there's some posts in this thread discussing the old Liverpool Way. But I tell you something, there never was one single Liverpool Way on the pitch. Teams changed with the years, the players we had and football in general. What we always did have a knack of... getting the most out of the players we had and putting them in a system that suited them best.

Of course, it all started with Shankly's old pass and move, and that did pretty much stay as the basis of everything we did. But there was huge differences between Shankly's first great team and his second, let alone Paisley's and Kenny's versions.

You have to remember Kenny is steeped in our traditions, and he's done it before. He's no mug. Still, like I've said, I'm very concerned with seeing no clear plan. Maybe that will change when injured players come back and he can start getting his preferred 11 on the pitch. But, like lots of posters on here have said... there seems to be no link between the teams at the club, like there's no one philosphy behind it all. That's a problem. We need to set out our system, and ingrain it right through every player at the club from bottom to top. And I'm not really the one to say what that system should be. But if were going back to a Shankly 4,4,2, with a big un and a little one up top, like Toshack and Keegan, well okay, let's get it done. If we're going back to Kenny's 88 Liverpool way, of Aldo and Beardsley, so be it. My problem is, I can't see what we are supposed to be heading at. But then, like I said, I'm not the sharpest.

[RyanBabel19]

No. There's plenty of us who talk about the old days, the teams and players we've seen. In fact, most of us over 50 do nothing but that. And there's some posts in this thread discussing the old Liverpool Way. But I tell you something, there never was one single Liverpool Way on the pitch. Teams changed with the years, the players we had and football in general. What we always did have a knack of... getting the most out of the players we had and putting them in a system that suited them best.

Of course, it all started with Shankly's old pass and move, and that did pretty much stay as the basis of everything we did. But there was huge differences between Shankly's first great team and his second, let alone Paisley's and Kenny's versions.

You have to remember Kenny is steeped in our traditions, and he's done it before. He's no mug. Still, like I've said, I'm very concerned with seeing no clear plan. Maybe that will change when injured players come back and he can start getting his preferred 11 on the pitch. But, like lots of posters on here have said... there seems to be no link between the teams at the club, like there's no one philosphy behind it all. That's a problem. We need to set out our system, and ingrain it right through every player at the club from bottom to top. And I'm not really the one to say what that system should be. But if were going back to a Shankly 4,4,2, with a big un and a little one up top, like Toshack and Keegan, well okay, let's get it done. If we're going back to Kenny's 88 Liverpool way, of Aldo and Beardsley, so be it. My problem is, I can't see what we are supposed to be heading at. But then, like I said, I'm not the sharpest.

That's all i was looking for, a little education on our old sides different styles of play. I don't know too much about how they played so i'm always interested in hearing about it

Agree fully with your analysis of this season and you shouldn't put it as not being the sharpest, you make very good points about the club in every post i see from you. To be honest since the season began i'm yet to see someone pinpoint what we are trying to do and what our planned style and tactics are, the main issue i've had has already been brought up in here, the change from the distinct play style that we had when Kenny took over at the tail end of last season to the purchases and decisions that took us completely away from that.

[Vulmea]

Itīs the players mate. With better players it would work. Maybe not on a Barca level but way better than it did this season. The likes of Lewandowski, Kakawa or Kuba at Dortmund, Song, Rosicky or van Persie are head and shoulders above Downing, Enrique, Henderson in terms of game intelligence and technique on the highest possible pace.  We made the biggest mistake last summer and the one before, itīs really that simple. The reasons for these mistakes probably not so (simple).

Enrique maybe but Downing and Henderson look like technical players to me - they may also have game intelligence if they ever come out from behind their mother's skirts,  we may find out.

This year has been tough mentally for some of our players - far worse than I thought it would be or should be  - o.k. results have clearly made it harder to settle - but there are numerous example of players overcoming their early nerves - both Henderson and Carroll have looked better towards the end of the season.

We have all the expectations of a big club but the 5th biggest budget - more than most but seriuosly short of the others - and what makes it worse is so much of it has been wasted - the quality of our squad isn't good enough for what it costs - yet the expectations for Liverpool are still to win every game - that itself forces a style of play - to be on the front foot,  its the opposite for sides like Swansea and Norwich, even Newcastle they are not expected to force the game, they can sit back even at home and play on the counter. Swansea's beautiful football had won them one game in 8 before yesterday. Norwich got turned over 3 - 0 at home by a mid table Liverpool side. Newcastle have created less than half of what we have but have twice the conversion rate yet their manager somehow gets manager of the year............football.

Last season we got shut of a whole team of players more than we bought in ( 7 in  but 19 out,  all of whom had played at least a game in the first team - some on loan granted)  - all pro's 
This season we could easily do something similar - bring in 3 or 4 and get shut of 14 or 15 (ok some of them would be double counted from last year but there will also be another half dozen who've never got near the first team) and yet we claim we have no depth and poor quality  - how does that work? I think its one of the reasons we did not buy as we should have in January because we are carrying so much baggage.

This summer if nothing else needs to see us clear the decks and create a much leaner squad. It also needs to focus attention on actually bringing kids through that have a chance not paying lip service to it.  If we are going to do that we need to make decisions based around what we need to support our style of play - its why being LFC needs to be resolved sooner rather than later.

[steveeastend]

Enrique maybe but Downing and Henderson look like technical players to me - they may also have game intelligence if they ever come out from behind their mother's skirts,  we may find out.

Weīve been disagreeing on that since the beginning of the season but I really do think that Kenny was probably expecting too much from them. Itīs one of these things which big players have to deal with when becoming manager, to work with players not from the same level as themselves and the ones he was playing with.

I honestly think Kenny got it wrong here, there were just too many average talented players in our first eleven and I hope they will become what they are, squad players next season.

Downing may look kind of technical in his movement but he is very average, really. I watched him closely, people may think itīs down to luck or whatever to cross the ball perfectly but in fact itīs exactly down to being technically good enough to do so. I saw players cross the ball ten times in a row exactly to the same spot into the box, saw players having their head up all the time at full speed, knowing exactly where to put the ball around the box and in front of the goal, staying calm, almost joking with the goal keeper and still putting it into the net. Downing is far from this but itīs really pretty normal on the top level. Maxi being a perfect example here how good a pretty "normal" and not outstanding midfielder really is and what we have to expect if we wanna make it back top 4.

We have all the expectations of a big club but the 5th biggest budget - more than most but seriuosly short of the others - and what makes it worse is so much of it has been wasted - the quality of our squad isn't good enough for what it costs

I think thatīs the big question, why did it happen that we went from a dencent top quality squad under Rafa to overpaid, overvalued and yet aging squad? And the worst thing in all this is that there is almost no room for making mistakes anymore which is just a nightmare for Kenny. If he had taken over right after Rafa it would have been much easier to try some things and let it grow. But we are under pressure in terms of singnigs for not making mistakes anymore and this has nothing to do with expectations. It would be just very dangerous considering the strength of the current set of players to add more average quality on top of that as it would stuck us in mediocrity for many years to come. Donīt get me wrong, I donīt wanna come across negative all the time, but itīs the harsh truth at the moment.

[Fat Scouser]

With the players we brought in, I thought the idea was to play the way Chelsea did when Clarke was there. Big strong lump upfront, with a machine of a team behind him, getting the ball into him quickly as possible and wearing down opposition.
The buys seemed to point towards that, and, maybe, that is the general idea but we haven't had the players available to put the plan into any sort of prolonged action. But I really am not the sharpest lad. I've just got opinions, and at the moment I can't see us being headed in any particular direction.

Having said that, I know Kenny has his plans and knows exactly what he wants. And I still firmly believe Kenny must be given the time to see them plans out. Whether he can succeed remains to be seen, but I'm trying to look at the big picture and what scares me is... if Kenny is pushed, I don't see anyone being given the sort of time it's going to take to get us back on top. And that's me biggest fear for the club, a new manager every couple of years, setting out his 5 year plan and being sacked before he's got the first 2 under his belt.

Football's changed, that's true. But the time it takes to build a successful/dominant team hasn't. And if Kenny isn't going to be given that sort of time, who is?

If I thought Kenny had no chance of sorting it out, I'd honestly say, I thought it best for him to go. But I think it's too early to make that judgement and not giving him the time to stamp his vision on the club could lead to far bigger problems than the ones we have right now.

[Fat Scouser]

Didn't see your comment Steve, so that last one of mine was just answering Ryan's question. But while you've brought up Downing, do you think we were trying for Clarke's version of Chelsea? 
I've never really rated Malouda or Kalou, but was that what he was trying for. Mind you, Carroll's no Drogba. Not kocking the lad there. I'm happy with what he's doing right now and hopeful that he can keep improving. That doesn't mean, I want to see us play that way though.

[steveeastend]

Having said that, I know Kenny has his plans and knows exactly what he wants. And I still firmly believe Kenny must be given the time to see them plans out. Whether he can succeed remains to be seen, but I'm trying to look at the big picture and what scares me is... if Kenny is pushed, I don't see anyone being given the sort of time it's going to take to get us back on top. And that's me biggest fear for the club, a new manager every couple of years, setting out his 5 year plan and being sacked before he's got the first 2 under his belt.

Football's changed, that's true. But the time it takes to build a successful/dominant team hasn't. And if Kenny isn't going to be given that sort of time, who is?

Thatīs the big problem ahead of us. It would be a dangerous thing and financially impossible to change manager every year and let them reshape the squad. I understand that NESV want to bring in a DoF exactly for the purpose but in our current situation another mistake in personell, be it DoF, or player, or even manager would be very dangerous.

[steveeastend]

Didn't see your comment Steve, so that last one of mine was just answering Ryan's question. But while you've brought up Downing, do you think we were trying for Clarke's version of Chelsea? 
I've never really rated Malouda or Kalou, but was that what he was trying for. Mind you, Carroll's no Drogba. Not kocking the lad there. I'm happy with what he's doing right now and hopeful that he can keep improving. That doesn't mean, I want to see us play that way though.

I honestly donīt know but from what Iīve been seeing on the pitch I donīt think it has anything to with Chelsea to be honest other than the way we were defending.

From what Kenny is quoted there is pass and move mentioned all the time and I really think he tried to have us play the way he was brought up, Jock Stein school.

The way the players have been brought in give little to no indication on the intentions behind it as there was just too much pressure going on back then and I donīt think Clarke had any say in all this other than giving an opinion.

But as I said, this is just an observation from the outside and all we can do is look at what is going on the pitch and give an opinion.

[Vulmea]

To be honest since the season began i'm yet to see someone pinpoint what we are trying to do and what our planned style and tactics are, the main issue i've had has already been brought up in here, the change from the distinct play style that we had when Kenny took over at the tail end of last season to the purchases and decisions that took us completely away from that.

Think what we've tried  we've generally deployed 4 at the back, 2 central players, a wide left player in an advanced position , a wide right player tucked in and getting forward less and then two central  forwards - the fullbacks have been allowed to get forward. The front four have been switched about and at times its looked more 433 than a lopsided 442. We've also gone long
more often but in part I think thats down to the midfield options being buggered especially after we lost Adam's long range passing from the centre.

The cup final was a classic example of a plan simply not working and unlike others I'm sure there was a plan. The players,  one in particular just failed to deliver it. I have no idea  what Downing was trying to do for the first 60 minutes but when one thing fails then the plan has to be adjusted. For me Downing does not play as he should - it makes no sense the way he plays - it does not fit with any of Kenny's teams from the past - he has usually employed a pacey winger to stretch play, wide and long, take the fullback on the outside, provide an outlet ball, break up the oppositions back line - whether it was Barnes or Ripley or whoever  - it creates an asymetrical shape (much as Rola indicated with Dortmund) - the problem is Downing does not play as a winger -  he does not commit the fullback and consequently he doesn't drag the centre back across to cover either. If he did then the whole dynamic of the game shifts.

So if Downing is not playing as a winger what happens to the plan? There's no out ball, the forwards can't react, the midfield can't go anywhere - it looks like a shambles no space, no purpose.
Even worse the winger plays safe, keeps the ball passes it backwards or inside and the pace of the game becomes snail like. Now in part thats down to the players - if the lads having a poor game we need to adjust unfortunately our adjusting frequently reverts to 'boom' as we try and by pass midfield and get it forward in a more direct route. Again in the final neither Spearing nor Henderson had the ability in the final to switch play quickly, Spearing in particular slows the game even further - so Gerrard drops isolating Suarez.........

We also clearly like to use the long ball to Caroll to either hold up or flick on - its a useful tactic but it neeeds to be used wisely - we haven't always done that and Carroll hasn't always played well enough to justify it but when he is on song it allows us to switch play in a second.

In terms of football last season and this I'd argue we've played better football on more occasions this season than on the occasions we did it last season we just have not scored and goals make a massive difference in games and the way and freedom you play in. Three nil up its easy to look spectacular we've only really got to that position once this year.

The lack of cohesion this season I think is much more down to mentality than planning - we've looked good far too many times and then gone hiding after we've conceeded for it to be coincidence - we've not turned up in games as well - you can't really balme a lack of style for those failings because whatever style your told to play isn't going to work -  in terms of the season I think thats a bigger issue. In terms of going forward we need to find other means of stretching the play,  get in a more reliable player to do it or improve the ones we've already got..

[steveeastend]

I wanna add something to the points raised by FS and Vuelma in terms of the intentions we probably had at the beginning of the season.

I think what kind of can be said so far of NESV, or whoever responsible for the communication policy of the club, that the club has dealt with everything related to the football side of things pretty strict and almost "hidden secret". Be it regarding the intentions behind the sales of Torres or Meireles (where it as well could have been the case of having to sell them in order to save/make money), the overall tactical goals of our football or the responsibilites shared between Comolli and Kenny....we all know pretty much nothing.

I donīt know if itīs an english thing but compared to the german league, where pretty much everything is stated in public, dealt with in a very open and brutal honest way, which is sometimes painful for the people involved, we really do know nothing here as statements from one day are more often than not completely different to the way the club is acting the very next day.

For example it could well be the case for NESV to have the need of making money, selling players in order to make up for some expenses related to the purchase which would be totally understandable. But compared to Dortmund, Schalke or Bayern, where the intentions of transfers, ins and outs, the goals in terms of the football to be played, are dealt with in public and the persons involved openly stating their personal view, itīs impossible to figure on the intentions or any insight on the structure of our club.

I am not sure which way is the better way, probably itīs impossible for an english club to be that "open" considering the english press...

[Vulmea]

I wanna add something to the points raised by FS and Vuelma in terms of the intentions we probably had at the beginning of the season.

I think what kind of can be said so far of NESV, or whoever responsible for the communication policy of the club, that the club has dealt with everything related to the football side of things pretty strict and almost "hidden secret". Be it regarding the intentions behind the sales of Torres or Meireles (where it as well could have been the case of having to sell them in order to save/make money), the overall tactical goals of our football or the responsibilites shared between Comolli and Kenny....we all know pretty much nothing.

I donīt know if itīs an english thing but compared to the german league, where pretty much everything is stated in public, dealt with in a very open and brutal honest way, which is sometimes painful for the people involved, we really do know nothing here as statements from one day are more often than not completely different to the way the club is acting the very next day.

For example it could well be the case for NESV to have the need of making money, selling players in order to make up for some expenses related to the purchase which would be totally understandable. But compared to Dortmund, Schalke or Bayern, where the intentions of transfers, ins and outs, the goals in terms of the football to be played, are dealt with in public and the persons involved openly stating their personal view, itīs impossible to figure on the intentions or any insight on the structure of our club.

I am not sure which way is the better way, probably itīs impossible for an english club to be that "open" considering the english press...

we used to have a Liverpool specific tradition of keeping everything in-house - Kenny has said in several press conferences that we will return to that - all of our board room activity will be handled behind closed doors and the fans and the press will only be told what the owners believe they need to know about the dealings behind the scenes.

in part its a reaction to the 'washing of our dirty laundry in public' that occurred under the last two half wits which dragged the clubs reputation very low.

[rola]

A few articles on Klopp and Dortmund from the excellent Ralph Honigstein - picked out a few to illustrate the ups & downs oh him trying to implement, establish & maintain his approach. Important to rember that it's not always plain sailing - success has a way of disguising the mistakes people make.
Mad Genius article - bit in here about "concept football" and the philosophy & approach
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/raphael_honigstein/11/11/klopp/index.html

Questions about whether they could sustain success after season 1.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/raphael_honigstein/02/16/borussia.dortmund.longevity/index.html

Growing pains - CL difficulties & a team that perhaps doesn't have "quality" in depth.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/raphael_honigstein/11/25/dortmund/index.html

Just before decider with Bayern - a bit on the tactical differences between two teams but interesting commentary on how Dortmund had got to stage of earning respect of superpower opponents.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soccer/news/20120410/bayern-dortmund/index.html

That's enough on Kloppo from me for now.

Going to give some thought to what our approach might be - I said earlier I haven't worked it out - maybe I just haven't tried hard enough. I can't believe that we're moving forward without any overriding football objective.  I think we're a bit unfair to lament what we're not seeing or getting and point to what other teams have achieved as examples of how it could or should be.  It might be difficult to see what it is because there's too many pieces missing for it to form a coherent picture.  I'll have a crack in a bit anyway. 

[Bob Loblaw]

we used to have a Liverpool specific tradition of keeping everything in-house - Kenny has said in several press conferences that we will return to that - all of our board room activity will be handled behind closed doors and the fans and the press will only be told what the owners believe they need to know about the dealings behind the scenes.

in part its a reaction to the 'washing of our dirty laundry in public' that occurred under the last two half wits which dragged the clubs reputation very low.

Why do we all seem accept that keeping things behind closed doors is some sort of grand noble thing? When really it's designed to protect the people involved in those meetings and nothing more.

I'd love a bit of clarity surrounding the club, as I'm sure most would, as the whole thing feels more than a bit directionless atm, when maybe that's not the case.

[Vulmea]

Why do we all seem accept that keeping things behind closed doors is some sort of grand noble thing? When really it's designed to protect the people involved in those meetings and nothing more.

I'd love a bit of clarity surrounding the club, as I'm sure most would, as the whole thing feels more than a bit directionless atm, when maybe that's not the case.

There's a difference between wanting to know and needing to know.

And I think saying the policy is only there to protect themselves is harsh - should they tell us the transfer budget, how they actually rate the players performances, what the delays are in planning permission if they've been told not to, how the financing is being looked at if it gives away commercially sensitive information?

If decisions are genuinely by consensus then scapegoating somebody is cowardice. If no decisions have been made then what do you expect them to say. Should they be laying out our transfer strategy and playing style?

Most businesses keep their decisions to themselves - its a matter of ethics and good practice.

Part of the idea is because as fans we should primarily be intersted in the football - we aren't for the most part accountants, of business leaders and although some of teh information is interesting it not really anything to do with us

there was a thread a while back about selecting the CEO as though he was a centre forward - none of us are even vaguely qualified and yet so many think they are - they dont need the encouragement

Throw in the fact that the media are a travesty, they run whatever editorials they want to - the manager is winning -  its keeping his cards close to his chest, losing and he's hiding - I despise them - they play the fans like a lynch mob and if some of our fans can't see past the games they play I despise them too.

I'd like a bit of clarity too doesn't mean I should get it or that I'm entitled to it though.

[steveeastend]

I think the question is what itīs best for the club. Iīd like to think that an open policy has more advantages than not.

[Vulmea]

I think the question is what itīs best for the club. Iīd like to think that an open policy has more advantages than not.

In an ideal world I'd agree with you but the world is far from ideal

Now if the club was fan owned it becomes a more relevant point

[subroc]

It is curious and I'm wondering whether its because we were more adaptable than those sides - we did have an ability to mix up our play making it less easy for the purists to identify and categorise - Keegan and Toshack were a different set up to Rush and Dalglish to Barnes, Aldo and Beardsley -sure there was commonality - we had ideas but we also had the intelligence not to be too precious in our style - it was a more eclectic 'style' and thats also possibly were the struggle comes from today. The Milan side was drilled and rilled and drilled again, if teh ball is in X, then you are at Y. The Ajax side had a freedom of expression but almost a complusion to play a certian way (much as Barca now). I think Liverpool sides have been more pragmatic especially when it comes to domestic and european football for example switching from bludgeoning sides at Anfield to one up front cat and mouse in europe.
There are two ways to look at it though - one would be, shit the players are just being sent out with no plan , the other they are being taught to think and come up with their own
plans. Much as I detested our performance second half againt City at their place in the league cup - we had to have been drilled in that defensive display, we've played better in other games against the top 6 especially at Anfield I dont think thats just chance - we've looked organised for the most part, if anything we've lacked ambition.

....If one of our strengths is to be variety, teams not knowing how we will come at them then its also going to be more difficult for us to spot.

I find most of this entirely too negative and too black and white. The discussion has ranged from the differences in leagues, to those of the players, from where we are currently as a club to where we want to be.

If we are going to play 'pass and move' and we will - what form will it take - even Arsenal looked better when they had the option to play the ball to Adebayor in the air, they are a step up in quality from Swansea, capable of beating Barca playing football and yet they haven't won anything in 6 years despite this season having the most prolific striker in the league - and btw being completely outplayed by Liverpool at Anfield - if even the myopic Wenger says so then thats good enough for me and should be for you too - the main accusation labelled at Arsenal no plan B.  We've ruled out just trying to play even faster than Barca  making it 'tik tak' because it wont work. So exactly what will and why?

I have highlighted the portion in your post above because it seems to me that it is similar to what I was saying in my post. The Liverpool Way was pass and move of a more muscular and physical sort. It may not be as "pinball" like as the Barcelona model but in our heydays, it was no less metronomic and if anything, it was more inexorable because we put enormous pressure ont he other side through the constant probing and passing that moved them here and there. And we always retained the physicality and long ball ability that enabled us to vary our play. So int hat sense we were not like barcelona and we were always much more pragmatic than Arsenal, being stiffened by a spine of veterans who had seen it all and knew how to win championships, and never relying completely on youngsters until they have proven themselves better than the seniors they were meant to replace. Arguably Arsenal's failure to win anything the last few years have been more out of their manager's refusal or inability to strengthen his team with truly world class players, instead relying on young and promising players who were not quite ready yet notwithstanding the example of their so-called `invincibles' who were experienced and seasoned players.  So their lack of success has nothing to do with their pass and move game but had everything to do with their lack of depth and quality in their squad.

Also, it seems to me that you use Arsenal's game with us almost as if you are suggesting that that somehow invalidates pass and move as a legitimate default mode. Were they really outplayed by us? Arsenal had an injury crisis at the time and they played veyr much unlike Arsenal usually does, being a defensive and counterattacking game. So they conceded possession to us. But in the end, all we could muster was an own goal and we lost the game. You can talk about missed opportunities and hitting the woodwork etc, but at the end of the day we could not prise their defences open.

We have no need to copy Barcelona or Arsenal because the traditional way we play is already good enough as updated to the present day. All that I am saying is that we should take a leaf from our history and play that way consistently again.

[Vulmea]

Going to give some thought to what our approach might be - I said earlier I haven't worked it out - maybe I just haven't tried hard enough. I can't believe that we're moving forward without any overriding football objective.  I think we're a bit unfair to lament what we're not seeing or getting and point to what other teams have achieved as examples of how it could or should be.  It might be difficult to see what it is because there's too many pieces missing for it to form a coherent picture.  I'll have a crack in a bit anyway. 

As you say the piece when things aint going great do make some interesting points

Particularly interesting is the marked difference between German and European styles - I guess City and United could say the same thing this season. I thought the whole things was becoming much more homogenised maybe not.

be excellent to read what you think about going forward 87 posts nowhere near enough - you need to stay in more.

[Vulmea]

I have highlighted the portion in your post above because it seems to me that it is similar to what I was saying in my post. The Liverpool Way was pass and move of a more muscular and physical sort. It may not be as "pinball" like as the Barcelona model but in our heydays, it was no less metronomic and if anything, it was more inexorable because we put enormous pressure ont he other side through the constant probing and passing that moved them here and there. And we always retained the physicality and long ball ability that enabled us to vary our play. So int hat sense we were not like barcelona and we were always much more pragmatic than Arsenal, being stiffened by a spine of veterans who had seen it all and knew how to win championships, and never relying completely on youngsters until they have proven themselves better than the seniors they were meant to replace. Arguably Arsenal's failure to win anything the last few years have been more out of their manager's refusal or inability to strengthen his team with truly world class players, instead relying on young and promising players who were not quite ready yet notwithstanding the example of their so-called `invincibles' who were experienced and seasoned players.  So their lack of success has nothing to do with their pass and move game but had everything to do with their lack of depth and quality in their squad.

Also, it seems to me that you use Arsenal's game with us almost as if you are suggesting that that somehow invalidates pass and move as a legitimate default mode. Were they really outplayed by us? Arsenal had an injury crisis at the time and they played veyr much unlike Arsenal usually does, being a defensive and counterattacking game. So they conceded possession to us. But in the end, all we could muster was an own goal and we lost the game. You can talk about missed opportunities and hitting the woodwork etc, but at the end of the day we could not prise their defences open.

We have no need to copy Barcelona or Arsenal because the traditional way we play is already good enough as updated to the present day. All that I am saying is that we should take a leaf from our history and play that way consistently again.

Sub - Its an interestng take on Arsenals lack of success but doesn't the other subject being discussed, Dortmund, suggest that a young team can succeed - maybe its more down to Wengers management of the young players than the fact that they are young - they presumably need specific management to get them through rough times - Arsenal have had a tendency to crumble at key points in the season- maybe older more experienced heads would have an edge holding things steady but I dont think thats just the perogative of the old I think its more a failing of  Wenger himself in that he has a problem on the man management of that part of the game - but that perhaps comes back to you point maybe older heads in the team could help him as much as the players around them.

The Arsenal game we'll have to disagree on, I'm happy that Wenger, their keeper and RVP are all in my corner - the whole point was we did carve them open again and again - we just missed the chance we created - we just missed them all - 3 - 0 at half time would have been reasonable - if we had not created chances but just pinged the ball about around the edge of the area you'd have a point. We had the injury crisis going into the game - Agger, Gerrard, Johnson all missing - all three all pulled out the week of the game - and of course Lucas long term injury - they were the inform team having battered Spurs. One thing I think is missed when discussing our missed chances - sure the missed chnaces are bad enough but there is also the lift a goal gives to one side and the deflation it gives to the other. The momentum it generates changes games. Time and again we've missed that this season. Time and again rather than be deflated the opposition have grown in confidence because we have not scored whilst the doubts have grown in our own team and its confidence dipped, the defence become more edgy etc. We then judge the performance based on the result rather than the actual performance when a convincing win has probbaly been a posts width away.

I think the downward force of that continual deflation took its toll post Arsenal - we looked far too often not like we'd given up but that we knew the script and couldn't be bothered reading it again. I'm not sure what we need to do to bust the goal scoring problem though but thats not really an issue of style imo - although I've read the clutching at straws about how our chances are somehow different than every other teams, that even our clear cut chances aren't as clear cut, the plain and simple view I have is that we've just had rank bad finishing and a shed load of bad luck and its impacted our season massively. Maybe we have to create twice as many chances - if so we'll really need to look at our style but Newcastle created half the chances and scored the same number of goals.

[subroc]

Sub - Its an interestng take on Arsenals lack of success but doesn't the other subject being discussed, Dortmund, suggest that a young team can succeed - maybe its more down to Wengers management of the young players than the fact that they are young - they presumably need specific management to get them through rough times - Arsenal have had a tendency to crumble at key points in the season- maybe older more experienced heads would have an edge holding things steady but I dont think thats just the perogative of the old I think its more a failing of  Wenger himself in that he has a problem on the man management of that part of the game - but that perhaps comes back to you point maybe older heads in the team could help him as much as the players around them.

Wenger used to merge youth and experience in almost perfect proportions. He would then get rid of the players who were too much trouble or who were getting long in the tooth and replace them with better or younger replacements who could do the job. His wheels has seemed to fall off a little in the past few years as he seemed to allow pragmatism to be overcome too much by his ideas, but I have never read any criticism of his man management skills or any o fhis players getting on his case for not being supportive enough. In fact the contrary seemed to be the case as he resisted calls for him to spend more even though Arsenal's directors kept insisting he had money to spend. 

The Arsenal game we'll have to disagree on, I'm happy that Wenger, their keeper and RVP are all in my corner - the whole point was we did carve them open again and again - we just missed the chance we created - we just missed them all - 3 - 0 at half time would have been reasonable - if we had not created chances but just pinged the ball about around the edge of the area you'd have a point. We had the injury crisis going into the game - Agger, Gerrard, Johnson all missing - all three all pulled out the week of the game - and of course Lucas long term injury - they were the inform team having battered Spurs. One thing I think is missed when discussing our missed chances - sure the missed chnaces are bad enough but there is also the lift a goal gives to one side and the deflation it gives to the other. The momentum it generates changes games. Time and again we've missed that this season. Time and again rather than be deflated the opposition have grown in confidence because we have not scored whilst the doubts have grown in our own team and its confidence dipped, the defence become more edgy etc. We then judge the performance based on the result rather than the actual performance when a convincing win has probbaly been a posts width away.

I think the downward force of that continual deflation took its toll post Arsenal - we looked far too often not like we'd given up but that we knew the script and couldn't be bothered reading it again. I'm not sure what we need to do to bust the goal scoring problem though but thats not really an issue of style imo - although I've read the clutching at straws about how our chances are somehow different than every other teams, that even our clear cut chances aren't as clear cut, the plain and simple view I have is that we've just had rank bad finishing and a shed load of bad luck and its impacted our season massively. Maybe we have to create twice as many chances - if so we'll really need to look at our style but Newcastle created half the chances and scored the same number of goals.

I am not so sure that our style has had no effect in the poor finishing. Of course our finishing has been bog awful but i have noticed that our approach play has been devoid of ideas and far too static. That has to have had an effect on confidence among the players as well, which leads to snatched chances and lowered confidence and expectation of successl. And as you say, that also has an effect when the same player tries to score again later.

[steveeastend]

Subs, very good posts.

The question will be if itīs possible to translate the way we were playing 20 years ago into todays football.

In my opinion, and when listening to people like Barnes on the difference between nowadays pace and when he was playing, itīs not as it is simply too demanding.

This would also be one of the reason (besides the lack of top talent of some players) for our poor finishing this season. When playing pressing with a tactical set up spread all over the pitch, deep sitting defense and 40 yards average to make it to the box for our midifielders, there is little to no room left for staying full concentrated in the final third.

[subroc]

Subs, very good posts.

The question will be if itīs possible to translate the way we were playing 20 years ago into todays football.

In my opinion, and when listening to people like Barnes on the difference between nowadays pace and when he was playing, itīs not as it is simply too demanding.

This would also be one of the reason (besides the lack of top talent of some players) for our poor finishing this season. When playing pressing with a tactical set up spread all over the pitch, deep sitting defense and 40 yards average to make it to the box for our midifielders, there is little to no room left for staying full concentrated in the final third.

While it is true that the game those days was slower, still the players today are fitter and faster on the whole as well. I really don't see why we cannot play the old ways today with some updating, nor why the Bacelona way is somehow that different from ours. In fact we can go one over Barcelona if we do it right because we would be able to shift seamlessly into Plan B and batter them with Stoke style crossing and the big target man bulling his way into the box - Barcelona are not capable of playing like that.

I agre with yuo that a big reason why we are finishing poorly is due to the huge gap betwen MF and the FWs. If we were really passing and movign properly, such a gap cannot open up. I reckon that many of the players are holding position when they should be moving into position, trusting in their teammate to correspondingly move onto the position they just vacated to cover them. Instead what you have is Adam hanging back, Downing flitting ineffectually half way down the left wing before turning back and returning the ball. The centre of the pitch between the half way line and the box rarely sees many red shirts - most of the time the only players we see there are Suarez or a fairly immobile Carroll. The move cannot gel when everyone seems paralysed by fear that the other side will break into counterattack and expose them if they lose possession.

[Vulmea]

Subs, very good posts.

The question will be if itīs possible to translate the way we were playing 20 years ago into todays football.

In my opinion, and when listening to people like Barnes on the difference between nowadays pace and when he was playing, itīs not as it is simply too demanding.

This would also be one of the reason (besides the lack of top talent of some players) for our poor finishing this season. When playing pressing with a tactical set up spread all over the pitch, deep sitting defense and 40 yards average to make it to the box for our midifielders, there is little to no room left for staying full concentrated in the final third.

Makes no sense to me I'm afraid - it looks like you are searching for reasons where they dont exist to suit preconceived ideas or preferences - our style of play places more pressure on our players than Sunderlands or Everton's  or Stokes or West Broms or Newcastles or Chelsea's or any other team in the league except Wigan... - we create more chances, more clear cut chances than all of them - but somehow our style of play (or rather lack of it) means we have the joint worst conversion rate in the league 9% - we've  hit the woodwork over 30 times and missed 5 penalties - those three facts are not coincidence - come on its nothing to do with style - individual confidence yes - poor finishing yes - not style of play. There's no rational reason to think it.

Evertons goals soring was identical to ours before the last game - style of play or just crap finishers until Jelavic turned up?

Is Newcastles goal return down to style of play? Half as many chances the same number of goals? That should make them more anxious surely? For every game we've dominated and lost they've been dominated and won. They've had two strikers who statistically have been the best ever in the prem at various points this season. Ba and Cisse really, the best in the prem in a single season? Call it style of play if you want to but Newcastles are were they are because they've scored a ridiculous amount of goals compared to chances. Used to be caled luck but that seems to be frowned up these days there has to be an underlying reason...........a butterfly flapping its wings in a forest and making no noise.

I'm afraid you are trying to see what you want to see - its frustrating and its annoying but our poor goals return is because we just dont score enough not because of our movement or creativity or even our defence dropping off to deep - they may well be things we need to improve but they haven't really impacted our scoring of the chances we have had - the biggest thing thats influenced it is we kept missing and kept on missing until we didn't believe we could score.

In this case the chicken definately came before the egg.

 

[subroc]

Makes no sense to me I'm afraid - it looks like you are searching for reasons where they dont exist to suit preconceived ideas or preferences - our style of play places more pressure on our players than Sunderlands or Everton's  or Stokes or West Broms or Newcastles or Chelsea's or any other team in the league except Wigan... - we create more chances, more clear cut chances than all of them - but somehow our style of play (or rather lack of it) means we have the joint worst conversion rate in the league 9% - we've  hit the woodwork over 30 times and missed 5 penalties - those three facts are not coincidence - come on its nothing to do with style - individual confidence yes - poor finishing yes - not style of play. There's no rational reason to think it.

Evertons goals soring was identical to ours before the last game - style of play or just crap finishers until Jelavic turned up?

Is Newcastles goal return down to style of play? Half as many chances the same number of goals? That should make them more anxious surely? For every game we've dominated and lost they've been dominated and won. They've had two strikers who statistically have been the best ever in the prem at various points this season. Ba and Cisse really, the best in the prem in a single season? Call it style of play if you want to but Newcastles are were they are because they've scored a ridiculous amount of goals compared to chances. Used to be caled luck but that seems to be frowned up these days there has to be an underlying reason...........a butterfly flapping its wings in a forest and making no noise.

I'm afraid you are trying to see what you want to see - its frustrating and its annoying but our poor goals return is because we just dont score enough not because of our movement or creativity or even our defence dropping off to deep - they may well be things we need to improve but they haven't really impacted our scoring of the chances we have had - the biggest thing thats influenced it is we kept missing and kept on missing until we didn't believe we could score.

In this case the chicken definately came before the egg.

I would respectfully differ on that point. Newcastle and everton have just latched on the most optimal way to use their available assets. This season, we tried to shoehorn square pegs ionto round holes and it didn't work and the result swent against us and everybody's heads started drooping. That's the biggest reason IMHO. When you have found what works, your confidence goes sky high and that helps you in turn get even better results. On the other hand, if you do not understand the system or if you cannot play according to what the system demands of you, you are unable to perform well and your confidence takes a hit.

End of last season, things were going good because Dalglish followed a system of play that fit with the players he had. Even the player who did not fit did not affect the overall team play too much as the momentum of the others overcame that. But this season, Dalglish got too ambitious and tried to integrate three new MFs - Adam, Downing and Henderson - at the same time. In other words, he ripped out the old heart of the team and replaced it without giving them a chance to find their feet, and then he tried to play them into form. Unfortuantely that had the opposite effect. Worse, Downing and Adam did not fit the pass and move mentality of the rest of the team and when adding to the adaptation woes of Carroll, it just snowballed. Then he made it worse by leaving Rodriguez on the bench most of the time and Kuyt on the bench part of the time and selling Meireles.

Confidence or lack of confidence cannot be the fundamental reason in itself - it happened because of some underlying reasons, and then it becomes a factor in itself.

[Vulmea]

Confidence or lack of confidence cannot be the fundamental reason in itself - it happened because of some underlying reasons, and then it becomes a factor in itself.

Yeah and my argument is because we didn't score - we didn't score and therefore we didn't win -  it increased the pressure and reduced the confidence - which meant we didn't score which meant we didn't win which increased the pressure and reduced the confidence - etc etc. Cause and effect. It began as misfortune, sloppy finishing, lack of precision, nerves. pressure of the new season and became a monkey on our back. As Dalglish said after theh Arsenal game, West Brom game, Stoke game etc etc if we'd taken just some of the chances we created it would not have mattered what the opposition did, we'd have won.

The evidence of chances created, conversion rate,  comparisons with last years stats (same number of chances created 14% conversion rate), comparisons with other teams (Newcastle 49% coversion rate of clear cut chances - Liverpool 29%) Only Wigan has such a poor overall rate as we do. No other team comes close to the number of times we hit the woodwork (more than double the prem average). No team comes close to missed pens. The evidence shows clearly that despite the style of play, despite any poor movement we simply missed more chances, more than average, more than our normal more than the normal for the same players at different clubs. I heard today we broke another record Downing had more shots without a goal  this seson  than any premiership player, ever.

Its not a subjective assessment of our movement or style - its a simple interpretation of the evidence we do have. I thought that would appeal to you Sub?

Now I can understand number of crosses, number of corners etc being deceptive - making them effective is dependent on accuracy, number of people in the box etc. So even though we head up the Prem for these two things I'm not using them as evidence of our failure to convert (having said that we are way up on our passes in the final third this season over last so somebody must have been in the final third but the Hodgson games may well have impacted that) simply comparing chances and our conversion rates. We stank at finishing this season and it cost us. 

[Nessy76]

End of last season, things were going good because Dalglish followed a system of play that fit with the players he had. Even the player who did not fit did not affect the overall team play too much as the momentum of the others overcame that. But this season, Dalglish got too ambitious and tried to integrate three new MFs - Adam, Downing and Henderson - at the same time. In other words, he ripped out the old heart of the team and replaced it without giving them a chance to find their feet, and then he tried to play them into form. Unfortuantely that had the opposite effect. Worse, Downing and Adam did not fit the pass and move mentality of the rest of the team and when adding to the adaptation woes of Carroll, it just snowballed. Then he made it worse by leaving Rodriguez on the bench most of the time and Kuyt on the bench part of the time and selling Meireles.

I wouldn't say he ripped the heart out of the team, it was gone anyway, and the major surgery he was forced to undertake to try and save it faced more complications than he expected.

I do think that the problem of fitting in too many players at once caused us a lot of trouble, you are spot on there, but I really don't see that we had a hell of a lot of choice. Gerrard and Lucas being unavailable, Meireles demanding a move, the three key players in the centre of midfield, we had no option but to field Henderson, Adam and Spearing, who let's not forget had very few first team appearances himself at that point.

Adam played fairly well alongside Lucas, looked lost without him. If we'd signed Adam into, say, the 08-09 squad, I'm sure he'd have settled a lot better, same is probably true of Downing.

[Nessy76]

We stank at finishing this seson and it cost us.

Very true. We've had pretty much an unbroken run of world-class goalscorers for so long (Torres, gap, Owen, Fowler, Rush, Aldridge, Rush, Dalglish, Keegan...) that it just seems bizarre to see us miss so many chances.

[steveeastend]

I'm afraid you are trying to see what you want to see - its frustrating and its annoying but our poor goals return is because we just dont score enough not because of our movement or creativity or even our defence dropping off to deep - the biggest thing thats influenced it is we kept missing and kept on missing until we didn't believe we could score.

Weīve been disagreeing here since beginning of the season, andstill do as in my opinion we donīt score exactly because the things you listed first and denied.

- no creativity, which means a lack of talent of the players involved in our attacking play (with the exception of Suarez and Gerrard, which is simply not enough.

- bad movement, which implements a lack of knowledge and understanding between the players, probably because of shallow tactical orders, not enough practising in training in this respect, which makes it impossible to play as quick and patient as necessary to wait for the right occassion.

- a lack of domination by playing a higher defending line in order to relocate posession to the final third.

- trying to make it through a season with only 2!! striker

Sorry mate but your explaination just doesnīt excist in football. We donīt score cause we "forgot" how it works because we missed a couple of chances at the beginning of the season? Come on, you donīt believe this, do you?

If we would have signed Jelavic our scoring had improvement cause of his striker qualities which would be solving problem four on my list above. Simple as that.

[Nessy76]

Weīve been disagreeing here since beginning of the season, andstill do as in my opinion we donīt score exactly because the things you listed first and denied.

- no creativity, which means a lack of talent of the players involved in our attacking play (with the exception of Suarez and Gerrard, which is simply not enough.

- bad movement, which implements a lack of knowledge and understanding between the players which makes it impossible to play as quick and patient as necessary to wait for the right occassion.

- a lack of domination by playing a higher defending line and in order to relocate posession to the final third.

Sorry but your explanaition just doesnīt excist in football. We donīt score cause we "forget" how it works because we missed a couple of chances at the beginning of the season?

Come on, you donīt believe this, do you?

If we would have signed Jelavic our scoring had improvement cause of his striker qualities which would be solving problem one on my list above. Simple as that.

It does come down to confidence. You often see players go through this, they have a bad game, it preys on their mind and they have another bad game, then another. They start to panic, to worry, to, even subconsciously, avoid getting onto the ball in the first place. Then one day, by sheer fluke, they score. A couple of minutes later, still high on the endorphin rush, they get another, and the problem apparently evaporates.

There's nothing weird or controversial about any of this. Personally, I don't think it entirely explains what we've seen this season, but looking at the evidence, it obviously has to be a factor.

[steveeastend]

There's nothing weird or controversial about any of this. Personally, I don't think it entirely explains what we've seen this season, but looking at the evidence, it obviously has to be a factor.

It is a factor but what I am trying to explain is that confidence comes from quality first. If there is no plan, or the player simply not good enough there is no way to gain confidence. Football is brutaly honest. No motivation in the world can make an average attacking player turn into a winner over the period of a season unless he is part of a winning strategy of the team as a unit which works. And no run of bad luck can turn a set of top quality players loosing it all together AT ONCE for almost every game of the season. Not possible.

[Vulmea]

It is a factor but what I am trying to explain is that confidence comes from quality first. If there is no plan, or the player simply not good enough there is no way to gain confidence. Football is brutaly honest. No motivation in the world can make an average attacking player turn into a winner over the period of a season unless he is part of a winning strategy of the team as a unit which works. And no run of bad luck can turn a set of top quality players loosing it all together AT ONCE for almost every game of the season. Not possible.

I keep trying simply because you continually ignore the actual evidence in preference for you own subjective judgement.  This is a thread about style so if you have a genuine point I'm happy to accomodate it,  especially in terms of creating more chances but what is perverse is how you ignore the chances we have created and our failure to actually convert them and lay the blame at what you percieve is the lack of  a plan thereby ignoring the large periods in many games this year when we've played well and dominated.

Few of our players have scored at the rate they normally do - thats not a question of their quality - put them in exactly the same scenario in the box last year and they'd have scored more -  its a statistical anomoly for this year. The same quality of chance, less goals.

The game plan has created just as many chances as last year (actually one more clear cut chance and 50 more shots,  thats 50 more but actually10 less on target ) but our conversion rate is 6% less overall - 9% the joint worst in the league. In terms of clear cut chances its 29% thats 15% less than last year  - how the hell does that relate to where our back line is? And that deep line has conceded fewer goals than last year. Our cross completion is higher, passing higher, possession in the final third up 50% - you make it out as though we are running round in packs like kids in a playground.

I did a quick count up using Jakes excellent thread on the main board (http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=293490.0) I disagree slightly with Jake but not much - we played well, dominated and our play deserved victory in 20 of our 38 games, in another 13 we probably weren't good enough to deserve to win  and in just  5 we deserved nothing - thats not a side struggling to play - its a side where results have not reflected the play, a side that is probably too fragile mentally and thats a side that whatever the plan would probably fail to deliver it, not because it can't create as you suggest because the stats show the opposite,  but that can't win because it can't finish.

We've hit the woodwork 33 times - a premiership record - the next nearest is 24 and the normal average is 14 - but thats down to bad movement? Presumably our penalty takers had bad movement as well when missing 5 penalties another stat we lead the way in.

if we have no creativity how have we created more chances then the vast majorty of sides and more clear cut chances than all bar the top 5 teams? If our stats were like Newcastles (half as many chances, the same number of goals) would that be a result of better creativity or just better finishing? I'm not saying we can't improve our play. I'm not even disagreeing that the team has sometimes lost the plot, gone off plan, hoofed the ball aimlessly, they've done all that and if we can cut that out we'll improve. If we win some games, the games our play created the chances to win then our confidence wil improve and we'll score and win more.

Where did Carroll's second half of the season performances come from? Was Suarez's hatrick a result of a change in style or just good/outrageous finishing, he's hit the post twice in games,  three times this year - creativity, movement, backline or just finishing? Gerrards hatrick against Everton? Maxi's scoring rate is actually slightly up on last season. The style thing has no supporting evidence at all that I can find. I'm happpy to be convinced though - always a pleasure

[steveeastend]

I'm happpy to be convinced though - always a pleasure

Itīs funny cause I kind of can imagine on the things you look when watching a game and the way you see it, itīs probably the complete opposite of my view but that makes it very interesting, but tough to discuss

I really do think that we kind of going in circles as I tried to explain my thoughts on this many, many times and itīs always a combination of a couple of errors in transfers, tactics and players. Just as having a plan for a style which is, unfortunately more often than not a combination of a lot of factors, always leaving room for mistakes, which become visible on the pitch and which is again the only thing we can refer to when itīs not working.

You are right, we had a plan, but it didnīt work with the players we bought although you might insist it did because of the chances we created. But thatīs only half of the story. There is a difference in the way chances are greated which will make it easier to finish them, in addition itīs simply the quality of the players being not there in order to convert them. I wrote in the other post, itīs not possible for a quality player to miss, or hit the post all the time....Suarez got back to score at the end of the season, Maxi did it all through. In contrast, the likes of Downing, Spearing, Enrique and to some extend Henderson and Adam will always be likely to play more on the error side than not as they are simply not good enough in playing football, passing, crossing, shooting etc. than it is required for the way Kenny wants them to play which is making their own decisions in a high pace pass and move play.

Itīs not possible to make an average player turn into a player who is good enough to cross the ball exactly where itīs supposed to be, at least past the first defender on a regular basis or making his own decision when itīs better to pass the ball around the box a little longer. And itīs not possible to turn an average talented player to convert chances when keeping his head down 9 out of 10 times, because he needs to in order to control the ball and the situation. But this is what we saw all season. Sloppy crossing, rushed finishing and pressing without the ball until we were to exhausted to go on. Until we could go on doing that, we created chances, yes, but I would rather call them "rushed" chances and I rarely had the feeling it would only be a matter of time until we take them as I could see that they were not the result of quality, more than a result of pressing without the ball and a rushed direct play and players doing their own thing.

Why did we convert those chances the season before under Kenny and why didnīt it take us so many chances to score? Is it a sign of quality for a team to create a lot of chances and not taking them (Maybe we were just missing a top striker, but I donīt think itīs that simple) or to score with little to no chances? Or is it a sign of quality for a team to save as much energy over an entire season and for that concentrating on creating only a few chances and take them?

I think you know the answer

[Vulmea]

I think you know the answer

I do you're as stubborn as me 

We'll have to agree on one thing though - to stop