Topic: Bridging the Gap to a Structured Playmaking Style

[Nessy76]

In terms of Dempsey joining the team in a central attacking midfield/forward role we have Suarez, Gerrard, Shelvey, Cole, Maxi, Aquilani, Pacheco, Adam with Suso, Teixera, Adorjan - its going to be a bit crowded - if he was early twenties like Sygurdsson it may make sense to get him in and watch him grow, and get rid of a couple of the older lads and their high wages but he wont be coming cheap - its an odd one for me......

I don't think Teixeira really plays that far forward. And he, Suso and Adorjan aren't likely to feature heavily for at least another year, which might make an older signing on a short deal a good idea. But that would ignore all the other options we have there.

[PhaseofPlay]

We'll have to agree to differ then

Dempsey is a versatile attacking midfielder - he's a good player but his attributes are markedly different than Carroll  to suggest he offers as much physically or aerially is just daft.
- Carroll can and has bullied the back four of most teams in the league - he can dominate centre halves in the air - Dempsey can do neither of these things - he does not intimidate the opposition and he does not dominate the opposition back four in the air - he may use movement and technique to be more effective but thats an entirley different argument to them offering the same physically or aerially, he clearly does not offer as much in either category but he may offer more to the team as a player in the style we assume Rodgers will employ.

In terms of Dempsey joining the team in a central attacking midfield/forward role we have Suarez, Gerrard, Shelvey, Cole, Maxi, Aquilani, Pacheco, Adam with Suso, Teixera, Adorjan - its going to be a bit crowded - if he was early twenties like Sygurdsson it may make sense to get him in and watch him grow, and get rid of a couple of the older lads and their high wages but he wont be coming cheap - its an odd one for me......

From US Soccer (The national team and federation website):

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1148443-clint-dempsey-vs-landon-donovan-whos-better-and-why

Although AC wins MORE aerial duels, the idea that Clint Dempsey doesn't win any and isn't an aerial threat is plainly incorrect. He also matches up physically. What he adds is touch, intelligence and close control, things that AC doesn't have. For me, it's not an either/or situation; i'd love AC to be here for the start of the season. But your view on Dempsey based on the criteria you've mentioned is not correct - he is well known for his physicality and aerial ability in US soccer circles. Maybe not as good as AC, but good enough given his extra attributes.

[exino]

This is not a problem for a team with systematic possession. It is not a problem because the basic principles of defense state that the nearest player must always delay or pressure the ball, depending on whether they are covered. If they don't, then the attack gets time to either dribble or pick the best pass. Possession also requires movement, and in a possession team based on Spanish or Dutch principles, this movement is always diagonal and away from the ball, designed to put the marking defender in a bind - for example:

--------O2-X2--------------
-----------------------
----------O1------------
----------X.-----------

"X." is the player with the ball. X2 is the 2nd attacker. O1 is the 1st defender, O2 is the marking defender. If X2 makes a diagonal checking run to the right of X., like so:

--------O2-----------------
-------------------X2--
----------O1------------
----------X.-----------

Then O2 now has a problem. If they follow X2, they create space behind O1 which another player can move into (or X. can dribble into if they can beat O1 1v1). If they remain in their cover position, then X2 has space to receive and turn, at which point O2 has to press if they are the nearest player. This creates an overshift from the defense, depending on X.'s next move, because someone has to cover that space. At some point within 5 seconds of that single checking run, a player either near the ball or wide of the ball is going to have a lot of space to play in. The key then is to recognise this player and get the ball to them as quickly as possible, because they have space, and space equals time, and time equals better decisions and technical precision. So a high quality passing team playing a bunker team like Stoke actually has an advantage if the players are willing to put in the work to make the checking runs that might not always get them the ball, but which might open up space for someone else to take advantage with a penetrating run of their own. The goal primary goal of the defense is to prevent goals, then to regain possession, and to ultimately not lose their shape in doing so. Direct teams succeed by taking advantage of the moment of transition (notice I said direct, not long ball - Mourinho, rather than Wimbledon) where the attackers are out of defensive position. This is why Hodgson is limited, because he is more concerned with maintaining defensive shape in the attack than in hurting the opposition with movement. Possession teams succeed by pulling defenders out of their defensive shape and exploiting the space created with speed and mobility. This is why Mowbray failed at West Brom - the players were good at passing and keeping the ball, but they didn't make enough penetrating runs and their movement to create space was lacking. What Barca does so well (and what Rodgers is hoping to recreate with Liverpool) is to accept the fact that the ball is quite often lost when the ball is played into the forward positions (because the concentration of defenders is greater in the final third); to take advantage of this, Barca and Rodgers play the pressing game, which means that when the ball is lost, it is lost in a dangerous area close to the opponent's goal, and winning the ball back here has all the advantages mentioned previously that direct teams enjoy (attacking team breaking shape to get into attack on the transition), but these advantages are gained closer to the goal than further from it. This is actually why a player like Carroll might not work in this system against a Stoke - the transition needs speed and one-touch short passes with lots of diagonal runs to and away from the ball to create the space.

Where Rodgers might have a problem is when the other team is super-disciplined in it's shape and also possesses the ball rather than goes direct - a classic Italian team, in other words. City will be the biggest problem I think, and possibly Chelsea. But we don't need to beat those teams to challenge for the title. We just have to make sure we beat all the other teams outside the top four at home, and not lose to them away. I think Rodgers' system might be capable of doing that if it is bedded in quick enough.

I would say that Tiki-Taka is the MOST pragmatic philosophy of all. Look at it's genesis - Spanish players aren't generally the biggest athletes, so trying to outmuscle the other team isn't practical. The Spanish mantra is to defend and press high up the field, so all-out attack on transition isn't practical. The practical ideas would be to possess the ball for extended periods with quick passing to have the following mulitple effects: Eliminate the size differential by moving the ball out of 1v1 situations as fast as possible (based on Van Gaal's ideas with Ajax in 1995 of never going 1v1 with the ball unless there's a shooting opportunity); eliminate the fatigue factor by resting on the ball after a period of high pressure (based on Romanian temporisation in the 90's). In this light, it is VERY pragmatic, and only by default does it satisfy a lot of idealistic views of the game. But in essence, it is absolutely pragmatic, in much the same way as bunker-and-counter is pragmatic, although less aesthetically pleasing to the casual fan.

I think this is as accurate a general statement of the summary of coaching philosophies as I've read. Van Gaal's idea was based around never going 1v1 and taking defenders on, because 1v1 is really 1v2 with the covering defender. If there is a second defender covering the first defender, then that means there is a gap somewhere else on the field, and Van Gaal's philosophy is to get the ball to that gap before it closes, as fast as possible, and take advantage of the space. This, of course, results in extreme circulation of the ball, but minimal movement from position (as players need to know where the support is instantly - the Ajax 95 team were not allowed to move outside certain zones within the formation in order that the player on the ball will always know where the support was. Benitez had elements of that too).

Guardiola's idea is to play into pressure and either turn or play out with the first touch (the real definition of Tiki Taka and the reason they base their entire coaching philosophy from youth to first team on rondos) to the supporting attacker behind the ball. As the first receiver is generally checking into the ball they will also usually be bringing a marking defender with them, thus creating space behind the marking defender. This is where the turn or the second pass is played, to a late running player (which is why their fullbacks are so effective). They also change their runs based on the number of touches of the receiver.

I think Rodgers will fall somewhere between the two. As you say, triangle passing will be the main method - this is to isolate defenders, force them to chase, and tire them out, while preserving your own energy. As the players chasing the ball the most will be forwards and attacking midfielders of the opposing team, it means that late in the game they may not have the energy for counter attacks, while the Liverpool attacking players will be less fatigued (fatigue at the top level is usually a function of anaerobic fitness rather than aerobic fitness). Thus I believe that we will see a lot of games won by Liverpool in the last quarter of normal time when Liverpool players are still relatively fresh and explosive, while the opposition (the 80% of teams that don't have options off the bench in attack) will be tired and lose their explosive edge.

Incidentally, Trapattoni is a great exponent of this triangular passing and possession (not so much with Ireland, but in the past). It is a crucial part of the old Italian game, and if people want to see that type of possession at the highest level they might do well to watch old tapes of Bayern, Red Bull Saltzburg and Benfica. The defensive side is a lot different, but the triangle passing and possession is Trapattoni's favoured method of playing with the ball).

That sounds about right. Although in a way Van Gaal is also being proactive by searching for that unbalanced zone in the defense. Conversely, Guardiola was also being reactive a little in exploiting ruthlessly any gaps in an undisciplined defense. It's always probably 80% of one thing and 20% another with most top coaches.

Quite impressive is your knowledge of the game. You know quite a bit of Total Football. Love the username BTW. Keep up the brilliant post! 

From US Soccer (The national team and federation website):

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1148443-clint-dempsey-vs-landon-donovan-whos-better-and-why

Although AC wins MORE aerial duels, the idea that Clint Dempsey doesn't win any and isn't an aerial threat is plainly incorrect. He also matches up physically. What he adds is touch, intelligence and close control, things that AC doesn't have. For me, it's not an either/or situation; i'd love AC to be here for the start of the season. But your view on Dempsey based on the criteria you've mentioned is not correct - he is well known for his physicality and aerial ability in US soccer circles. Maybe not as good as AC, but good enough given his extra attributes.

Spot on their.

Vulmea, Dempsey may not have the quality of headers, & isn't as tall or strong as Andy but he does elevate himself quite well. Believe it or not, arguably as well as Andy. I actually remember reading in an interview with him that he played basketball when he was younger, a sport in which jumping is one of the primary attributes required. Take what you will from that.


Anyways lets get back to systems of play which I feel is a much more constructive discussion & what this thread is about rather than discussing individual players capabilities.

[Adamski LFC]

This is not a problem for a team with systematic possession. It is not a problem because the basic principles of defense state that the nearest player must always delay or pressure the ball, depending on whether they are covered. If they don't, then the attack gets time to either dribble or pick the best pass. Possession also requires movement, and in a possession team based on Spanish or Dutch principles, this movement is always diagonal and away from the ball, designed to put the marking defender in a bind - for example:

--------O2-X2--------------
-----------------------
----------O1------------
----------X.-----------

"X." is the player with the ball. X2 is the 2nd attacker. O1 is the 1st defender, O2 is the marking defender. If X2 makes a diagonal checking run to the right of X., like so:

--------O2-----------------
-------------------X2--
----------O1------------
----------X.-----------

Then O2 now has a problem. If they follow X2, they create space behind O1 which another player can move into (or X. can dribble into if they can beat O1 1v1). If they remain in their cover position, then X2 has space to receive and turn, at which point O2 has to press if they are the nearest player. This creates an overshift from the defense, depending on X.'s next move, because someone has to cover that space. At some point within 5 seconds of that single checking run, a player either near the ball or wide of the ball is going to have a lot of space to play in. The key then is to recognise this player and get the ball to them as quickly as possible, because they have space, and space equals time, and time equals better decisions and technical precision. So a high quality passing team playing a bunker team like Stoke actually has an advantage if the players are willing to put in the work to make the checking runs that might not always get them the ball, but which might open up space for someone else to take advantage with a penetrating run of their own. The goal primary goal of the defense is to prevent goals, then to regain possession, and to ultimately not lose their shape in doing so. Direct teams succeed by taking advantage of the moment of transition (notice I said direct, not long ball - Mourinho, rather than Wimbledon) where the attackers are out of defensive position. This is why Hodgson is limited, because he is more concerned with maintaining defensive shape in the attack than in hurting the opposition with movement. Possession teams succeed by pulling defenders out of their defensive shape and exploiting the space created with speed and mobility. This is why Mowbray failed at West Brom - the players were good at passing and keeping the ball, but they didn't make enough penetrating runs and their movement to create space was lacking. What Barca does so well (and what Rodgers is hoping to recreate with Liverpool) is to accept the fact that the ball is quite often lost when the ball is played into the forward positions (because the concentration of defenders is greater in the final third); to take advantage of this, Barca and Rodgers play the pressing game, which means that when the ball is lost, it is lost in a dangerous area close to the opponent's goal, and winning the ball back here has all the advantages mentioned previously that direct teams enjoy (attacking team breaking shape to get into attack on the transition), but these advantages are gained closer to the goal than further from it. This is actually why a player like Carroll might not work in this system against a Stoke - the transition needs speed and one-touch short passes with lots of diagonal runs to and away from the ball to create the space.

Where Rodgers might have a problem is when the other team is super-disciplined in it's shape and also possesses the ball rather than goes direct - a classic Italian team, in other words. City will be the biggest problem I think, and possibly Chelsea. But we don't need to beat those teams to challenge for the title. We just have to make sure we beat all the other teams outside the top four at home, and not lose to them away. I think Rodgers' system might be capable of doing that if it is bedded in quick enough.

Great explanation there phase, diagonal running, as highlighted by yourself, has the benefit of distracting both 01 and 02, as well as the right defender/midfielder 03 allowing X1 to break with or without the ball into space.  This IMHO is the great thing about diagonal running involving both the oppositions defenders and midfielders creating space between them.

Let's see this in action alongside terrier like action to get the ball back.  Capitalizing on turnover possession gives far more opportunity for chaos and hence to score a goal.

[fowlermagic]

Thing is neither we or Swansea under Rodgers did feck all away from home last year and that is my main worry as I am not sure the players / manager have the capability yet to win away from home enough to challenge for 4th. The lads may keep the ball well in parts but our final cutting edge is midtable at best at the moment and needs a massive investment to add the 2 plus players to convert possession. In the past year or two we have lost Torres, Kuyt (was good for 10 league goals prior to last season), Maxi and possibly on the verge of losing Bellamy & Carroll. You throw in the fact SG may never score 10 league goals for us in a season again if he plays further back and we start to look toothless.

Honestly we can chat about formations / playing styles etc but when your first 11 at the moment contains only one guy that looks like scoring 10 plus league goals, Suarez then we are behind the 8 ball.

[exiledinyorkshire]

Thing is neither we or Swansea under Rodgers did feck all away from home last year and that is my main worry as I am not sure the players / manager have the capability yet to win away from home enough to challenge for 4th. The lads may keep the ball well in parts but our final cutting edge is midtable at best at the moment and needs a massive investment to add the 2 plus players to convert possession. In the past year or two we have lost Torres, Kuyt (was good for 10 league goals prior to last season), Maxi and possibly on the verge of losing Bellamy & Carroll. You throw in the fact SG may never score 10 league goals for us in a season again if he plays further back and we start to look toothless.

Honestly we can chat about formations / playing styles etc but when your first 11 at the moment contains only one guy that looks like scoring 10 plus league goals, Suarez then we are behind the 8 ball.

Surely our squad is on paper better than that of Swansea. I would imagine that Rodgers genuinely believes that he can get 10-15% more out of this Liverpool squad than he did of that Swansea squad, so one can only assume he would expect to be even better at home and away. Done on the cheap his way achieved far more than anybody ever thought it would. Done at liverpool...............well we'll see.

Actually just looked, we got more points away from home than we did at home last season.Its actually at home that Brendan needs to get it right.

[Vulmea]

Vulmea, Dempsey may not have the quality of headers, & isn't as tall or strong as Andy but he does elevate himself quite well. Believe it or not, arguably as well as Andy. I actually remember reading in an interview with him that he played basketball when he was younger, a sport in which jumping is one of the primary attributes required. Take what you will from that.

I've not said that Dempsey is poor in the air or some form of weakling just that saying he offers the same aerially and physically as Carroll is daft. They offer different abilities, one best suited to a role as a versatile attacking midfielder and the other is a classic english No. 9.  One is 6 1 the other  6 3  - one scares defenders and dominates good normally aerially dominant centrebacks in the air - the other is decent in the air.  You could if your were that way inclined build a team around Carroll's aerial and physical abilities
you would not do that for Dempsey.
Physically I've been slightly disapointed with Andy's battling qualities (which could just be part of his generally poor season and certainly improved in the last month ) and Dempsey looks after himself well but I suspect I have higher expectations of Carroll and I'm expecting to see him impose himself physically whilst with Dempsey its more of an unpleasant surprise.

[rola]

Dempsey is an odd choice given his age. Doesn't exactly fit the profile of the young players about to hit their prime. Kuyt & Maxi out. Dempsey in. Not sure what the overall improvement would be.

Tactically he might be what is needed for whatever new system & style were going to play. I don't see a massive difference in quality or ability or game intelligence in Dempsey over either of the two we've let go.

The comparisons with Carroll are specious. Its not a like for like situation. It's a question of fit. Carroll clearly doesn't fit in managers opinion which is why he's been touted back to toon.

The only thing I can possibly think of that might make Dempsey an attractive proposition is that the runs he makes and the positions he takes up in and around the box make him a good fit for proposed set up.

[No666]

Thing is neither we or Swansea under Rodgers did feck all away from home last year and that is my main worry as I am not sure the players / manager have the capability yet to win away from home enough to challenge for 4th. The lads may keep the ball well in parts but our final cutting edge is midtable at best at the moment and needs a massive investment to add the 2 plus players to convert possession. In the past year or two we have lost Torres, Kuyt (was good for 10 league goals prior to last season), Maxi and possibly on the verge of losing Bellamy & Carroll. You throw in the fact SG may never score 10 league goals for us in a season again if he plays further back and we start to look toothless.

Honestly we can chat about formations / playing styles etc but when your first 11 at the moment contains only one guy that looks like scoring 10 plus league goals, Suarez then we are behind the 8 ball.

In yesterday's interview Rodgers specifically addressed this:

People talk about the goalscoring last year. They talk about playing two strikers or one striker, but it’s about your players.

“For a lot of last season the team played 4-4-2. People cry out about playing two strikers up front, yet everyone at the end of the season said we didn’t score enough.

“With 4-3-3 you play with three strikers, depending on the types they are – whether it’s one up and two wide or one up and two more narrow.
“I want to bring more goals into the group. That can help the group.

“That means the draws can turn into wins and the losses turn into draws. If we can get goals into the team and keep our stability from behind then hopefully we can fly.”

Read More http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-fc/liverpool-fc-news/2012/07/18/brendan-rodgers-ponders-short-term-goals-for-liverpool-fc-100252-31417202/2/#ixzz214H2Vpx5

Despite various concerns expressed in these threads about cover for Lucas, or Enrique, it would seem all of transfer budget is being concentrated on this one issue.

[Nessy76]

Despite various concerns expressed in these threads about cover for Lucas, or Enrique, it would seem all of transfer budget is being concentrated on this one issue.

Although I firmly believe that we do need cover for Lucas (and ideally for Enrique) it's quite right that the priority is getting a first eleven on the pitch, cover can come later. That said, we know nothing about where the budget is being concentrated.

We've only signed one player, a forward, and we've let two forwards go.

[CRAZY HORSE EMLYN]

I agree with a lot of what you're saying Zeus. I think, to ride roughshod over all the clever analysis I would make the generalisation that it's more about packing out the middle, and our full backs getting right up and down the pitch... which Johnson and Enrique certainly can. Key difference is no longer expecting wingers to ping over crosses, but dominating the middle of the pitch.

Also wonder whether Suarez will effectively become our Iniesta – the magician who pulls the strings – and Borini our Villa, the lone poacher up front.
                                 

                                       Reina

                                 Agger     Skrtel
Johnson                                                                     Enrique

                                         Lucas

            Henderson    Gerrard                 Aquilani 
                           
                                                Suarez 
                                 
                             
                                         Borini 

[Adamski LFC]

I think Borini is a wide forward by trade with good finishing boots, only centre forwards that come to mind are Andy Carrol and Adam Morgan.  The rest are wide forwards or wingers or number elevens, IIRC this late

[No666]

I just re-read that Guardian interview Rodgers gave just before the end of the season and the thing that shone out for me was that he defines his philosophy not as 'tika taka' nor 'pass and move', but 'pass-think'. Pass-think by its nature incorporates all the elements suggested by the other two titles - keeping it simple if needed, movement and exploitation of space, but always the emphasis on intelligence.

As an aside to that, I have some qualms about the transition period because I think where we are crucially short on strength in depth is in the intelligence department.

[apocalypse]

I just re-read that Guardian interview Rodgers gave just before the end of the season and the thing that shone out for me was that he defines his philosophy not as 'tika taka' nor 'pass and move', but 'pass-think'. Pass-think by its nature incorporates all the elements suggested by the other two titles - keeping it simple if needed, movement and exploitation of space, but always the emphasis on intelligence.

As an aside to that, I have some qualms about the transition period because I think where we are crucially short on strength in depth is in the intelligence department.

Link?

[PhaseofPlay]

I just re-read that Guardian interview Rodgers gave just before the end of the season and the thing that shone out for me was that he defines his philosophy not as 'tika taka' nor 'pass and move', but 'pass-think'. Pass-think by its nature incorporates all the elements suggested by the other two titles - keeping it simple if needed, movement and exploitation of space, but always the emphasis on intelligence.

As an aside to that, I have some qualms about the transition period because I think where we are crucially short on strength in depth is in the intelligence department.

I wouldn't be so worried about that. Game Intelligence is more about taking the high-percentage low-risk option more than it is looking to do something creative and genius. As an example, the famed "Hollywood Pass" - 90% of the time, this pass goes to the goalkeeper, or goes out, or is intercepted. It is a Low-Percentage, High-Risk pass. We have some players guilty of it. Game Intelligence instead requires players to continually assess the percentage risk of their next action BEFORE they make their move (on the ball or off the ball). Playing the safest pass possible until the risk of a through-ball or pass-int-pressure is worthy enough of an attempt, is Game Intelligence. The foundation of it is composure on the ball, and field vision off the ball. It will take about 6-8 weeks for this to be developed as a habit in the team. Those players who either persist in low-percentage plays will either be sold in January or before the season starts (if BR sees that they are just uncoachable players. This takes no more than 3 sessions to work out, btw. BR is experienced enough with players to be able to read a player that quickly, so there won't be any ambiguity if anyone leaves - they were uncoachable, not that they were bad players or didn't "fit the system")

[No666]

You've given me plenty of fodder for concern there, you realise: uncoachable players remaining until January...  On a side note, because 'concern' has become a default for most of us over the last few years when considering LFC, it's kind of a hard habit to give up. It's a problem in itself as we transition, because it mitigates against patience and composure if the early matches are disappointing.

[lankyguy007]

We were very vulnerable to losing the ball with our short build up last night. Especially with Roma pressing high, we conceded possession from horizontal passes a number of times and because in possession the centre backs opened wide and the full backs pushed on, when we lost it with the short build up, we were then very vulnerable to the counter attack with the spaces between the defenders. That first phase in possession is so key to a play making game because you organise pretty your whole attacking game around it and if under pressure we have problems keeping the ball in those positions, we'll be in trouble particularly if we lose it from a horizontal pass.

[No666]

Link?

The full piece is accessible on The Guardian website and most of it has been quoted extensively on here. This was the bit I somehow missed absorbing first time around:


"When I first came in I said to the players, we will push ourselves in every element of training, so it's reflective of the real game, so I don't have to go on about intensity all the time because that is an obligation," says Rodgers, who closely watches training all of the time. "This morning's session is based around football strength, small-space work, lots of options on the ball and covering the principles of our game, which are possession, transition, pass-think, pass-think, pass-think and the core ingredient of hard work."

[exiledinyorkshire]

didnt help first half having a goalkeeper that launched everything. Work in progress, its just as important to see what certain players cant do as what they can do. Adam looks alright though in this system. I think people tend to forget that he's actually a very clever player........with the ball.

[Nessy76]

You've given me plenty of fodder for concern there, you realise: uncoachable players remaining until January...  On a side note, because 'concern' has become a default for most of us over the last few years when considering LFC, it's kind of a hard habit to give up. It's a problem in itself as we transition, because it mitigates against patience and composure if the early matches are disappointing.

Only if you consider your role as a supporter to involve assessing the quality of the squad, and that isn't essential. Just get behind them!

[Not A Scouser]

Thanks to all in this thread for describing and explaining the Rodgers system.  It has made the preseason games much more interesting for me as I can immediately see on the pitch what has been explained here.  It helps to see the system being put into place rather than judging performances on shit/not shit.

The biggest thing I have noticed is the stretching of the formation to create more space.  Full backs and wide players stay very wide indeed and don't come looking for the ball.  The forwards push up the pitch and the defenders drop back making the area the team has to work in with the ball as large as possible.  The trickiest bit, and the area at which we are currently the worst, is the passing and movement in mid-field.  That was always going to be the hardest part, instinctively moving to make diagonal passes available so the ball can be moved quickly and safely.

[royhendo]

A key quote from the Telegraph.

Rodgers: "I will always carry more midfielders than probably most. I will try to carry five or six central midfielders because we always play with three. That’s the key part of our team. We have to command the game, dictate the tempo of the game and need to ensure that area is as fresh as we possibly can."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/9499527/Liverpool-manager-Brendan-Rodgers-friendship-with-Jose-Mourinho-helped-him-capture-Real-Madrids-Nuri-Sahin.html

[Kashinoda]

I'll preempt this and say I don't intend for this to be a vicious debate about Benitez, an attack on Rodgers or anything along those lines.

When watching the match, talking to fans or reading comments from journalists or fans all I seem to hear is the term 'Rodgers style' or 'the Rodgers way' of playing (It's getting a tad annoying, but that has nothing to do with this). I'm not a massive footballing person, I love the club but I have no real technical knowledge of the game, luckily there's a lot of insightful discussion here to fill the gap.

What I am wondering here is, how is the style different to that of Rafa's? From my understanding the philosophy was more or less the same, pass the ball a lot, keep possession and eventually a chance will come. Am I looking at this too simplistically? Plenty have said that our players need to adjust to this system, but for those of Rafa's regime surely they are quite familiar with the setup, of course I know it's not quite that simple.

If anyone could educate me I'd be grateful

[Phil M]

It's hard to answer as Rafa's plan never truly came fully to fruition due to Hicks and Gillette and later Purslow wielding the axe.

[Z e u s]

Rodgers is picking players on form rather than reputation for starters.

Sterling and Coates over Downing and Carragher.

Kuyt for example was undroppable under Benitez, regardless of his form.  It seems Rodgers will pick players in form or he has done so far. 

In terms of tactics?  Both want to control the match, so similar in that respect.  I think Rodgers prefers wide players who have real threat, when at times Benitez would sometimes like wide players who did a defensive job first rather than what they could offer in terms of pace and threat to the opposition - again look at Kuyt.

They have some similarities and differences.  But the same could be said for Dalglish and Rodgers - as we probably played better against City last season under Dalglish.  We created more clear chances in open play last season and against should have won.

Comparisons are probably not fair on either manager though, for various reasons.

[redgator]

Rafa rarely ever played 2 strikers up front. Rafa's tactics were a bit more conservative than what we've seen from Rodgers si far.

[Red number seven]

I'll preempt this and say I don't intend for this to be a vicious debate about Benitez, an attack on Rodgers or anything along those lines.

When watching the match, talking to fans or reading comments from journalists or fans all I seem to hear is the term 'Rodgers style' or 'the Rodgers way' of playing (It's getting a tad annoying, but that has nothing to do with this). I'm not a massive footballing person, I love the club but I have no real technical knowledge of the game, luckily there's a lot of insightful discussion here to fill the gap.

What I am wondering here is, how is the style different to that of Rafa's? From my understanding the philosophy was more or less the same, pass the ball a lot, keep possession and eventually a chance will come. Am I looking at this too simplistically? Plenty have said that our players need to adjust to this system, but for those of Rafa's regime surely they are quite familiar with the setup, of course I know it's not quite that simple.

If anyone could educate me I'd be grateful

I was thinking this when I was listening to the guff on the radio driving back from the match yesterday - apparently our defenders will take some time to adjust to a game where thaey are expected to pass the ball out from the back.

Excuse fucking me? When the same fucking balloons told us that the Owl was a great appointment the same fucking defenders couldn't adjust to booting the ball away, to the extent that Agger and Johnson got dropped by the prick. Honestly, you'd think Rodgers was taking over Dave Basset's Wimbledon in 1987.

With regards to the question generally, I think both managers wanted technically good, tactically good, hard working, hard pressing players. Both are all about retention of possession and domination of games.

If anything Rafa was perhaps more pragmatic - I suspect Rodgers is more of a purist than Benitez. Time will tell if this makes him a visionary genius or a quixotic fool.

[paddypower]

There is a lot of differences. Rodgers prefers to keep possession whereas Rafa was more direct and focused on getting Torres in behind from early passes by Gerrard. Rodgers like split centrebacks, and wingers who are good 1v1 and have less defensive responsibility. Rafa liked to be compact.  That's just a couple of things but overall they are very very different for me.

[Kashinoda]

Rodgers is picking players on form rather than reputation for starters.

Sterling and Coates over Downing and Carragher.

Kuyt for example was undroppable under Benitez, regardless of his form.  It seems Rodgers will pick players in form or he has done so far. 

Rafa was crucified in the press for dropping star players, and regularly rotated the squad so they would remain fitter towards the tail end of the season. I think if anything Rafa leaned towards the fitness side of things when choosing a line up.

I think during Rafa's reign Kuyt was undroppable at times, look at the 08-09 season. Kuyt was an Integral part of the machine.

We've yet to really know how he picks players anyway, two premier league games isn't a big enough sample to base a judgement on.

[lankyguy007]

They both like to control games, press as a team and keep the ball. They just have slightly different ways to go about it.

[fowlermagic]

Surely our squad is on paper better than that of Swansea. I would imagine that Rodgers genuinely believes that he can get 10-15% more out of this Liverpool squad than he did of that Swansea squad, so one can only assume he would expect to be even better at home and away. Done on the cheap his way achieved far more than anybody ever thought it would. Done at liverpool...............well we'll see.

Actually just looked, we got more points away from home than we did at home last season.Its actually at home that Brendan needs to get it right.

Home points last year were 27 versus 25 away points which is not the worse to be honest as top 4 away form is about 30.  Hands up I should correct myself and say Brendans primary aim is to improve our home form which should be closer to 40 points from our home game I think. I don’t think that’s a stretch as we should be able to dominate most home games possession wise anyway just a matter of knocking a few more goals in and changing those draws into wins. Little worried Brendans form with Swansea away from home was relegation worthy. 4 wins away from home with a squad that showed top 6-8 form at home. Hope that was just a blip but you have to wonder what happens to the system when they travel as we do not want to see that at Liverpool.

Squad looks better on paper but attitude has sucked for 2 – 3 years, he is starting fresh here with maybe 4 – 5 new faces in the starting 11 so cannot see us hitting the ground running without the odd hiccup.

In yesterday's interview Rodgers specifically addressed this:

People talk about the goalscoring last year. They talk about playing two strikers or one striker, but it’s about your players.

“For a lot of last season the team played 4-4-2. People cry out about playing two strikers up front, yet everyone at the end of the season said we didn’t score enough.

“With 4-3-3 you play with three strikers, depending on the types they are – whether it’s one up and two wide or one up and two more narrow.
“I want to bring more goals into the group. That can help the group.

“That means the draws can turn into wins and the losses turn into draws. If we can get goals into the team and keep our stability from behind then hopefully we can fly.”

Read More http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-fc/liverpool-fc-news/2012/07/18/brendan-rodgers-ponders-short-term-goals-for-liverpool-fc-100252-31417202/2/#ixzz214H2Vpx5

Despite various concerns expressed in these threads about cover for Lucas, or Enrique, it would seem all of transfer budget is being concentrated on this one issue.

So far Brendan has actually identified the center with possibly 2 new additions to the starting 3 man CM in Sahin and Allen. Possession is the key for him and the pivot area which sees the main distribution through it is the key. Our CM has been shyte to be honest since 2008/09 with only Lucas showing an improvement but still as a unit way off top 4 quality. Still worried about where the goals will come from as with all their possession Swansea scored 44 league goals. Brendan is not exactly dealing with much better material here as we only scored 47. To contend the top 4 I say you want to be averaging closer to 70 league goals so the system/players Brendan has worked with require nearly a 50% improvement in the final output. That will not happen overnight and I actually think Brendan may have to adjust his system a little so we can convert possession into better chances.  We need more tap in / one on one opportunities I think.

PS - sorry for the non response as totally forgot I even posted here

[Nessy76]

I'll preempt this and say I don't intend for this to be a vicious debate about Benitez, an attack on Rodgers or anything along those lines.

When watching the match, talking to fans or reading comments from journalists or fans all I seem to hear is the term 'Rodgers style' or 'the Rodgers way' of playing (It's getting a tad annoying, but that has nothing to do with this). I'm not a massive footballing person, I love the club but I have no real technical knowledge of the game, luckily there's a lot of insightful discussion here to fill the gap.

What I am wondering here is, how is the style different to that of Rafa's? From my understanding the philosophy was more or less the same, pass the ball a lot, keep possession and eventually a chance will come. Am I looking at this too simplistically? Plenty have said that our players need to adjust to this system, but for those of Rafa's regime surely they are quite familiar with the setup, of course I know it's not quite that simple.

If anyone could educate me I'd be grateful

There are some important differences to the two men. And not many of Rafa's regular players are still at the club.

For me, the main difference in approach is that Rafa was a tactician, he'd look at the opposition, the shape of the game, what was working and what wasn't, and he'd adjust, tweak and rethink, over and over. He wanted a squad that included all sorts of players, who could swap positions and change formations mid-game.

"Possibilities" was the watch-word, different types of player offered different tactical strategies, different ways to outfox the opponent. If something didn't work, Rafa was quick to change it and move on. His team selections were notoriously unpredictable, not because he was indecisive - far from it - but because he liked to make the other team guess, to make it hard for them to plan how to play against his side.

This may, in retrospect, have been a flaw; he treated other managers as though they were playing the same sort of game, which just isn't how many English coaches approach football, sadly.

The 4-2-3-1 formation we grew to associate with Benitez' Liverpool only arrived during a period of experimentation, a way to get the best out of Torres and Gerrard that allowed Kuyt to do what he did best and still gave us enough bodies to keep control in the middle. There was little sign that he planned us to adopt that before he did, and no reason at the time to assume it would be any more permanent than any other way we'd lined up over the previous three years.

Rodgers, on the other hand, is a man married to a philosophy of football. He knows exactly how he wants the team to line up, the shape he wants to play, and the way he wants the lads to use the ball. Broadly, his philosophy is not a million miles from Rafa's, keep possession, work openings, press when the other side has the ball, all good tactics. Rodgers though, has a sort of "playbook" in mind, he knows where each player should be looking to play his next pass to maximise numbers and opportunities. He knows when and where we should be trying to win the ball back. He wants a far more formulaic system in play, the players as cogs in a mighty machine. It demands more mentally of the players, but it puts more emphasis on the team.

In this way, at least, he's more in the tradition of British managers: This is how we'll play, don't worry about the other side, let them worry about us.

At least, that's how I'm seeing it.

[BMW]

The big difference for me Rogers way of playing is more aggressive.

[exiledinyorkshire]

Fascinated by the fact that Hendo doesnt look like he's going to be a Rodgers type player. Would have thought that he would have fitted in straight away. Any thoughts as to why?

[gamble]

He only plays with three in the middle and he absolutely loves Allen, who's place is set in stone. And maybe now after learning about Lucas he rates him too so there is only really one place up for grabs when everyone is fit

[lankyguy007]

Thought today was an excellent example of how to entice a team with the ball and exploit the space. Norwich were poor defensively, weren't compact and it was easy to break their lines but thought it was interesting how we controlled the play to hurt them.

At no point did we panic in possession. We recycled the play to Reina where we had a number of options. Because Norwich were trying to press high with their two strikers, our centre backs would pull wide to make themselves available for a short pass from Reina. If it went to Skrtel, he often played it to Wisdom who was playing deeper than Johnson. From there he would often play it down the line for Suso who would then turn, either by himself or by playing a pass inside and then receiving it (by which time he would have turned to face the play) and playing a forward pass.

If the ball went to Agger, he would always be looking for the vertical/forward pass to someone between the lines, generally Sahin or Sterling moving inside and while that pass was being made, Johnson would move up looking for the pass from the player who had just received between the lines and from there he could attack 1v1.

If both centre backs were being loosely marked, Allen would just drop into the middle to receive and because the Norwich central midfielders didn't want to come that far to pressure, he usually had time to turn and face the play. From there he would have a number of options to play a forward pass to.

The point is we all heard Rodgers talk in that fans interview a few weeks ago about facing teams who press high and how at Swansea he got Vorm to try and bypass that first line of pressure with a long pass and from there turn and have a 4v4. Well today showed that general idea, although generally it was Agger or Allen playing a forward pass along the floor rather than Reina having to play longer. Norwich were disorganised and were so vulnerable with space behind their backline but we exploited that. We enticed them with our short build up, found the forward pass, found space to turn and then we could always take advantage with Sterling or Suarez's mobility. Our game plan worked superbly well and although Norwich were poorly organised, we exploited it to maximum effect.

[exiledinyorkshire]

Lanky Guy you make a good point. The man has educated me. When Pepe was knocking it forward yesterday, i was able to see what we were trying to achieve due to Rodgers explaining himself in that interview. Its very good having a tactician explain himself to you, it stops me getting frustrated. I thought we exerted far less control in the game yesterday, but had far more threat going forward. We were direct and it payed off, its nice to see that when teams dont sit in we will be able to go for the throat. I dont mind a 5-2 jumpers for goal posts game, as long as we win. Where i have been frustrated for the last 20 years is when we have lacked the ability and patience to keep the ball and create against the draw seekers. Two different styles of play, and we have seen that with the pace we have we are very effective at the open game plan. The real bench mark is having the utter grinding ability and confidence to keep recycling the ball at places like Sunderland. Thats what rodgers "death by passing" is all about. Thats the level 3 football we have all craved for years now. The signs are good, the ball retention against Utd (although they were never parking a bus) and again at Westrbrom was very much progress.
Belief in the methods is slowly growing. The "Disciples" are being given game time, and the shirkers are being shown the door.

If we can keep this going for the next two games, then i think we will be well on the way to actually becoming a Rodgers side. Stoke is a game that offers a very unique set of problems to solve. My one worry is that under severe pressure from a very Physical side our two howlers per game will setus back a bit. However, 70 % of the ball is the way to go. With 70 % of the ball we will have control, and with that control we should, now we are selecting the clever crafty players, be able to get some penetration.

This is where i think Suso and Sahin are so important for us. The creativity they have displayed in the last couple of games has been really really good to see. Suso is so young, and at times has shown a niavity, but he really does offer something that we havent had arguably since King luis left, you just cant predict what hes going to do. Shain clearly offers penetration from deep, inticate build up play calls for somebody to be seeing 5 passes in front and he seems to be able to do that.

Very promising. But we could get bullied into mistakes by Stoke, so lets keep a lid on it until the next two games are won and the points are banked.

[royhendo]

Exactly what went through my mind
http://www.theanfieldwrap.com/2012/09/domination-the-dirty-work-is-paying-off/

[No666]

Great article, Roy. You're right - it won't be linear but the progress is visible.

[exiledinyorkshire]

As always Hendo, a great article mate.

Rodgers really is a breath of fresh air isnt he. I'm really pleased with the way he's getting the vast majority of the fanbase backing him as well. Its been a tough old start, but perhaps we are a more discerning lot than i had thought over the last couple of years.

Its been anything other than boring as well, perhaps we have that to look forward to, as teams come to anfield already looking for the exits and knowing full well what awaits them....... "Death by football". I cant fucking wait! Bore me Brendan bore me fella. They'll all be crying "BANANA!" come the last quarter hour.