Topic: Re-writing History, A Look to the Not So Distant Past

[alonsoisared]

One thing I think everyone can agree on, is that the last month has been shite.

After returning to form since Christmas, Brendan's Reds had closed down a ten point gap, winning big games at Anfield against Spurs and Man City, and on the road at Swansea and Southampton. 12 points from those four coupled with a defence and a goalkeeper that suddenly forgot what it was like to concede a goal, in with a fighting chance for FA Cup glory and all was looking well again. Our manager, after finding himself under scrutiny after a tough start to the season was being championed once more for his ability to mix things up and get us playing again, both within the media and our support. A couple of bad results against United and Arsenal followed up with a horrendous showing at Wembley has seen a huge tide change in our support. This feels very different to the pressure earlier in the season; many appear to have completely lost faith in the boss.

Questions immediately started arising about the bottle of this side. Yes, once we were miles back and the pressure was off, we started playing again. But as soon as we were back in with a sniff of it, we buckled and threw it away. This team does not have the character. "If we had the character, we would have won the league last season."

Every time somebody mentions last season, part of me wants to sit in a little corner and weep quietly to myself. How could it have ended in such bitter disappointment? Another part of me wants to tell anyone and everyone about just how fucking great we were.

We have come close to winning the league in my lifetime, but this time it was different. I can look back fondly on 08/09. After a couple of months of extreme frustration over Christmas and into February we went on a monumental run where we just couldn't stop winning. I don't need to reel of the wins, but it was great fun. Now and then i'll watch highlights of the win at the Etihad that year, the win at Old Trafford, the Madrid game, the late winner at Portsmouth, and i'll still feel joyful. Whenever I see Torres leaving Vidic on his arse before slotting home the equaliser I never once fail to clench my fists. And don't get me started on that Fulham game. Get in there Yossi you little beauty.

Last season though, it is just too fucking painful. I would love to look back at Spurs home and away, United home and away, Everton home, Arsenal home, Fulham away, West Ham away, Man City at home, Norwich away and feel pride, the same way I do about 08/09. Unlike 08/09, this was genuinely in our hands. For many of us, it was our first proper title challenge. We'd never seen our team sweep the rest of the country and the rest of Europe aside like some the older folk had, finally it looked like our time had come. Coutinho's winner against Man City on the most emotional occasion and I was sat at home thinking for the first time...fuck me, I think we might actually do this. With three games to play, we had it in our hands.

And then, came Chelsea. I just had a look on the official site and apparently tomorrow is a year since that afternoon. Liverpool 0-2 Chelsea. I'm shaking my head just fucking typing it. 12 wins on the bounce, only to be scuppered by that horrible bastard and his horrible bastard fucking club. I remember the overwhelming disappointment that day, I also remember partly thinking there's still a great chance that Palace or Everton could do us a favour. What I certainly don't remember, is anyone questioning the bottle or the leadership of Brendan Rodgers.

Fast forward a year (or 364 days) and in the frenzy to label our team as a bunch of bottlers and our manager as a chancer who came close to winning #19 because of the ability of Luis Suarez and the fact that our competition was shite, I have also seen a lot of people reference how last season ended to emphasise their point. Apparently, we bottled it. For me, this is completely re-writing history and I do not understand why people are doing it. I can only guess that there are a lot of people in our fanbase who have never taken to Brendan, and now is the time to twist the knife.

Again, take your mind back to last season. Chelsea with games in hand were in front but blew it with bad results at Palace, Villa and at home to Sunderland (amongst a few others). Man City had it in their hands but surrendered it in the space of a few days after dropping points to Arsenal and Sunderland at home. The Reds though, well we just kept winning. Everyone questioned, going into the last ten games, whether our inexperienced team and our inexperienced manager could handle the pressures of a title race. I remember after coming through that Sunderland game at Anfield (the same Sunderland who would go on to take points off both of our competitors) Carragher making the same point on Sky. Everyone questioned our bottle, but we looked completely fearless, completely unfazed.

The bollocks we showed to get through at Fulham with the late winner after going behind twice, away at West Ham where it could so easily have gone tits up after a foul on our keeper was ignored to stun us at half time. We saw out the last twenty minutes of that game without hardly giving them a touch of the ball. Nobody was questioning our character then. Neither were they questioning our character when we got through several other "must win" games in that run. Which takes me to the Manchester City game. That was our biggest domestic game for twenty years, coinciding of course with the Hillsborough anniversary, the talk of Gerrard's last shot at the league title. We stormed into a lead with fearless, attacking football. Man City showed their class to get back in but did we falter? Did we lack the fight? Did we shite ourselves and surrender? Did we fuck, Coutinho smashed us back in front and the mighty reds had the title in their hands. Nobody was questioning our bottle or our character then.

When we brought in Brendan Rodgers, we were not bringing in a man who had won masses of silverware in the past. We weren't hiring the finished article. We were not hiring somebody for the short term, who would come in, win a couple of trophies and piss off elsewhere. All of this is now being used against him as soon as the chips are down. Every manager starts with no medals won but I firmly believe that Brendan has shown that he can take us forward. We didn't win anything last season, but it is impossibly unfair to not give our man credit for what he achieved. And although we have gone backwards this season, we are still in a far healthier position than we were before he came in. We were in free fall for 3 seasons under 3 different managers. I worried earlier in the season that free fall might return but to turn it around post christmas, for me, showed the  character we have seldom shown in the last decade when things have started to go wrong.

I believe it to be incredibly unfair to label this manager and his squad as bottlers. We should not forget how much we overachieved last season, which largely is accepted to be because of our character, will to win and because of our young manager who's style became the envy of many clubs across Europe. We have won enough big games in the last couple of seasons to suggest to me that while we do have a problem at the moment, mentality isn't it. To see our own fans play down last season is mystifying to me. That season earns any manager the opportunity to fix his errors a season on. We took the piss out of Spurs enough when they sacked AVB, imagine if he took them from 7th to within a whisker of the title, playing breathtaking attacking football, and then sacking him the season after having lost their best player. We would be laughing our cocks off.

Brendan Rodgers deserves time. We deserve to see the plan when we brought him in honoured and brought to fruition. It was going to take time, so let it take time. We have already had more than a glimpse of how he can get us playing. I really fear we would only end up kicking ourselves if the baying mob that have appeared in the last month get their way.

[wemmick]

Maybe, but with respect to time and improvement, I haven't really seen BR improve from his mistakes between last season and this season. Last season we scored an incredible amount of goals, but we also concede an incredible amounts of goals because BR doesn't organize his defense well. This season we have improved our defense, although not because our back line is better organized, but because we sacrificed a midfielder or attacker to do it.

In the process of doing so, we haven't really seen some top-tier young talents, in Sterling, Markovic, Can, Moreno and Manquillo, develop properly into their specialized positions, and we haven't seen Lovren, Lallana, Lambert, Borini, Balotelli fully integrated into the squad. To be frank, I wouldn't be on the fence about Rodgers if he had the same or even poorer results this season if the squad was coming on leaps and bounds. Rodgers touts himself as a youth specialist, but as the season has worn on, he has become increasingly hesitant to integrate youth, and has had to make a number of different formation and tactical workarounds to even get the senior players playing at an acceptable level. It worked for a spell, but now we're in a rut again and the players we may need to get us back to winning ways aren't playing regularly or haven't been fully integrated into the squad. For me, it all goes back to an inability or non-desire on the part of Rodgers to coach defense.

All the money we've spent on attackers and general squad depth is wasted until we can play a free-flowing attacking game with an organized back-line. Either that, or buy players that can make-up for Rodgers short-comings as a coach. Last season was terrific offensively but horrific defensively. This season was always going to be a tough for him without Suarez, but he has struggled badly to put together a "team." I'm not sure he is ready to manage on four fronts yet. I'm not sure he is ready to build around youth when the pressure is well and truly on. That's what he signed up for, no?

[cdav]

Great post Alonsoisared, much needed when a lot of people are trying to rewrite what was some of the most breathtaking football any of us have witnessed last season as some sort of fluke. The one that really gets me is people saying all we had to do was play for a draw against Chelsea as if we went hugely gung ho. We played a controlled game and they capitalised on one mistake, the way some go on its like we were playing a 2-3-5 formation!

 I just don't understand the mindset of some fans, they seem to rejoice in being a whinging bastard- always on the negative downer, just waiting to say I told you so. Can't remember many of them being about when we were smashing teams last year- must have been horrible for them.

[alonsoisared]

Maybe, but with respect to time and improvement, I haven't really seen BR improve from his mistakes between last season and this season. Last season we scored an incredible amount of goals, but we also concede an incredible amounts of goals because BR doesn't organize his defense well. This season we have improved our defense, although not because our back line is better organized, but because we sacrificed a midfielder or attacker to do it.

In the process of doing so, we haven't really seen some top-tier young talents, in Sterling, Markovic, Can, Moreno and Manquillo, develop properly into their specialized positions, and we haven't seen Lovren, Lallana, Lambert, Borini, Balotelli fully integrated into the squad. To be frank, I wouldn't be on the fence about Rodgers if he had the same or even poorer results this season if the squad was coming on leaps and bounds. Rodgers touts himself as a youth specialist, but as the season has worn on, he has become increasingly hesitant to integrate youth, and has had to make a number of different formation and tactical workarounds to even get the senior players playing at an acceptable level. It worked for a spell, but now we're in a rut again and the players we may need to get us back to winning ways aren't playing regularly or haven't been fully integrated into the squad. For me, it all goes back to an inability or non-desire on the part of Rodgers to coach defense.

All the money we've spent on attackers and general squad depth is wasted until we can play a free-flowing attacking game with an organized back-line. Either that, or buy players that can make-up for Rodgers short-comings as a coach. Last season was terrific offensively but horrific defensively. This season was always going to be a tough for him without Suarez, but he has struggled badly to put together a "team." I'm not sure he is ready to manage on four fronts yet. I'm not sure he is ready to build around youth when the pressure is well and truly on. That's what he signed up for, no?

you make some fair points mate and I agree the new signings haven't bedded in as well as we hoped. Certainly the problem area is player recruitment, none of us really know who has control over that and it is something that the club badly need to sort out. If Rodgers is making the decisions then we need to strip him off that responsibility. I don't think its a sackable offence and it is something we as a club can correct by identifying the right targets and being willing to pay the wages.

It's as simple as that for me, based on what we saw last season we just need to go out there and bring in a couple of very good attacking players to get us where we need to be. On paper our squad was pretty average last season but our manager propelled them to a high level. He's an attack minded manager with poor options in attack. I'm positive that we're one or two players away from being right back where we need to be under this manager.

[alonsoisared]

Great post Alonsoisared, much needed when a lot of people are trying to rewrite what was some of the most breathtaking football any of us have witnessed last season as some sort of fluke. The one that really gets me is people saying all we had to do was play for a draw against Chelsea as if we went hugely gung ho. We played a controlled game and they capitalised on one mistake, the way some go on its like we were playing a 2-3-5 formation!

 I just don't understand the mindset of some fans, they seem to rejoice in being a whinging bastard- always on the negative downer, just waiting to say I told you so. Can't remember many of them being about when we were smashing teams last year- must have been horrible for them.

it's especially funny mate because one of the criticisms levelled at Brendan after the recent defeats was that he had abandoned his attacking principles. Yet on the other hand people are saying he was naive and shouldn't have chased the results against chelsea and palace. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[Miltonred]

you make some fair points mate and I agree the new signings haven't bedded in as well as we hoped. Certainly the problem area is player recruitment, none of us really know who has control over that and it is something that the club badly need to sort out. If Rodgers is making the decisions then we need to strip him off that responsibility. I don't think its a sackable offence and it is something we as a club can correct by identifying the right targets and being willing to pay the wages.

It's as simple as that for me, based on what we saw last season we just need to go out there and bring in a couple of very good attacking players to get us where we need to be. On paper our squad was pretty average last season but our manager propelled them to a high level. He's an attack minded manager with poor options in attack. I'm positive that we're one or two players away from being right back where we need to be under this manager.

Pretty average? Suarez was player of the year, probably as good as Messi and Ronaldo and would have been in the running for Ballon D'Or if he hadn't bitten Chiallini, and Sturridge was the best English striker.
Those two players pushed us way above the average level of the squad, and credit to Brendan for seeing the possibility of just giving them every chance possible to score.

We've been "a couple of good players" from winning it for 24 years, to be fair. Last year it was two good defenders, this year its two good attackers. 

I would have loved to have seen Sanchez playing for us this season with a fit Sturridge, but we didn't do enough to get Sanchez, and Daniel of course...

Hopefully this summer we will do more to get the targets we need, and maybe next season will be one that nobody has any readymade excuses for.

[Rob Dylan]

it's especially funny mate because one of the criticisms levelled at Brendan after the recent defeats was that he had abandoned his attacking principles. Yet on the other hand people are saying he was naive and shouldn't have chased the results against chelsea and palace. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Brilliant OP and this is bang on as well. 'Bottling' it in the Chelsea game would've been to go into our shell and abandon our normal way of playing which had brought us to the top of the table in the first place (especially as we're are terrible at trying to play for a draw). I can't understand people comparing that Chelsea match with the recent Man Utd and Villa games - we didn't bottle it, panic or fall apart. We played our normal game, we were positive without being reckless - yes we lacked a little spark because we were missing Sturridge and Henderson, but the game was in our control coming up to half time. Where we failed was our inability to break them down, but we were up against an extremely well-organised defence and they had no incentive to attack once they went ahead. But we didn't panic - if anything we were maybe too calm and methodical. Sometimes it happens, even the best attacking teams can struggle to break a team like that down (look at Barca against Chelsea). And then the Palace game, there was an element of panic in those last 10 minutes but that was the players, it wasn't the manager panicking, we'd been controlling the game with ease and there had been no threat whatsoever from Palace.

I think the way we approached all those games in our winning run shows that Rodgers and the team did not 'bottle' anything and had the right mentality - we played with confidence, and when things got difficult we just kept going and didn't panic. We showed calmness and determination, and belief in our ability to win no matter what.

I'd wanted to write something about last season but like you, I just find it too painful. I probably think about it every day. For it to happen the way it did, with Gerrard's slip and everything, was just unbelievable. I'd rather have lost to City than have lost it the way we did. Think I insulated myself a bit from the disappointment by not really thinking seriously that we were going to do it until after the Norwich game. But when you think about how amazing it would have been to do it the way we (almost) did - the football we played, the unexpected nature of it, Gerrard finally winning a title, and 25 years after Hillsborough - it almost couldn't have been any more perfect. It wouldn't have been the greatest Liverpool team to win a title, but in many ways it would've been the most special title win in our history.

Has to be said though, people talk like we threw away a 10-point lead or something, but the fact that we had to win 11 games in a row just to get to top spot, and the fact that just one defeat was enough to take it out of our hands, shows how fragile our position actually was. Yes we were five points clear with three games left - but City had four left, so it was effectively only two points. And something which is often overlooked is how good City were at the end - they won their last five games and we didn't. That was the difference.

So I don't go along with this whole idea of the manager (or team) 'bottling it' or not being a 'winner' - We had a winning mentality for 11 straight games (and they were not all easy), and nobody had predicted we would get anywhere near the title. The whole thing just turned on one piece of outrageously bad luck, at the worst possible time.

[Black Bull Nova]

Somewhere along the line we've lost some strength of character around the place,

Suarez was unique in terms of his application, you could see how he inspired everyone around him.

Gerrard is a shadow of last year, Chelsea, the world cup, his legs and shooting, he no longer can drive us forward, just a year on

We lost Daniel Agger, a big character, LFC through and through.

Not sure why things feel different but there is something lacking, just can't put my finger on it, possibly explains why we were so slow out of the blocks this season. Its a human thing, I've always said that we under-rate the impact of certain characters, Hypia and Xabi were immense in more ways than one, Souness, Hansen and Dalglish were more than just great players and Neil Ruddock had the opposite impact in the .

Shankly bought character, Paisley likewise, its rarer generally these days, but vital.

[rscanderlech]

People are discussing transfers and noting character issues, but wemmick's excellent list of caveats hasn't really been refuted. The key ones are that 1. many are saying that Rodgers young and learning and will improve over time but we witness him repeating a lot of mistakes
2. apart from the natural progression of a few individual players (Sakho, Coutinho, Henderson), we haven't really witnessed the team looking more complete, more professional, more mentally strong, more harmonious as a unit or expert in their roles as players. At least, I haven't, except that we have sometimes had greater width thanks to Moreno and Markovic/Ibe, although the latter two are not even wing backs. We still don't play with a high defensive line, we still can't really dominate possession with 'death-by-football' if we want to (except against weak sides who are happy to give us the ball, like West Brom) so we aren't a possession team really, and indeed we have lost our lightning counter attacks, and, very importantly as wemmick mentions above, our improved defence is simply due to having extra players with defensive roles in the team, rather than improved organisation (which is why I mentioned the high defensive line). We are also not at all a team that has mastered pressing. So there are huge tactical strides that we have yet to make, it's not only a personnel issue, although I know that the two are related.

Frankly, I am not entirely sure what Rodgers's desired style of play is, although if I had to guess I would say that it's some kind of superhuman fusion of the finest possession teams and the finest counter-attacking and pressing teams.

What concerns me in particular is the possibility that Rodgers intends to keep his back 4 defensive line where it is, and never push it up, and that he actually is out of ideas about how to improve defensive organisation and discipline.

It makes me wonder, is Liverpool and the pressure that comes with it, really the best place for a talented young manager to learn? Perhaps the spotlight is blinding him a little and the inability to breathe inhibiting him. At times it seems like he just needs a devil's advocate to grill him and keep his decision making objective and to share the burden of making tough decisions.

[SerbianScouser]

2. apart from the natural progression of a few individual players (Sakho, Coutinho, Henderson), we haven't really witnessed the team looking more complete, more professional, more mentally strong, more harmonious as a unit or expert in their roles as players.

You clearly haven`t watched us since mid-December till mid-March. Our underlying numbers were good as of any other team in the league on both sides of the ball not to mention we won 10 out of 13 games so we were clearly doing something right. As for `we just added another defender at the back`, why does it matter? Apparently he doesn`t learn from his mistakes but he managed for a prolonged period of time to keep us defensively solid - 14 goals conceded in the last 17 games is a decent defensive record that would always allow you to compete up top compared to last season`s defensive shambles of 1.34 goals conceded per game.

[wemmick]

you make some fair points mate and I agree the new signings haven't bedded in as well as we hoped. Certainly the problem area is player recruitment, none of us really know who has control over that and it is something that the club badly need to sort out. If Rodgers is making the decisions then we need to strip him off that responsibility. I don't think its a sackable offence and it is something we as a club can correct by identifying the right targets and being willing to pay the wages.

It's as simple as that for me, based on what we saw last season we just need to go out there and bring in a couple of very good attacking players to get us where we need to be. On paper our squad was pretty average last season but our manager propelled them to a high level. He's an attack minded manager with poor options in attack. I'm positive that we're one or two players away from being right back where we need to be under this manager.

You make fair points yourself

My only problem with buying more attacking players, even better ones, is that they will be bought to cover the manager's short-comings rather than just as an upgrade on what we have. I've seen links to players like Depay, who is fucking terrific, but I don't think he will be another Suarez. Suarez is almost a one of a kind goalscorer and playmaker. I just don't think many players, whether young or experienced, can fill his dual-role to make up for poor defensive coaching. It just seems like Rodgers would be asking our better attackers to do more with less, like this season. 

[PhaseOfPlay]

People are discussing transfers and noting character issues, but wemmick's excellent list of caveats hasn't really been refuted. The key ones are that 1. many are saying that Rodgers young and learning and will improve over time but we witness him repeating a lot of mistakes
2. apart from the natural progression of a few individual players (Sakho, Coutinho, Henderson), we haven't really witnessed the team looking more complete, more professional, more mentally strong, more harmonious as a unit or expert in their roles as players. At least, I haven't, except that we have sometimes had greater width thanks to Moreno and Markovic/Ibe, although the latter two are not even wing backs. We still don't play with a high defensive line, we still can't really dominate possession with 'death-by-football' if we want to (except against weak sides who are happy to give us the ball, like West Brom) so we aren't a possession team really, and indeed we have lost our lightning counter attacks, and, very importantly as wemmick mentions above, our improved defence is simply due to having extra players with defensive roles in the team, rather than improved organisation (which is why I mentioned the high defensive line). We are also not at all a team that has mastered pressing. So there are huge tactical strides that we have yet to make, it's not only a personnel issue, although I know that the two are related.

Frankly, I am not entirely sure what Rodgers's desired style of play is, although if I had to guess I would say that it's some kind of superhuman fusion of the finest possession teams and the finest counter-attacking and pressing teams.

What concerns me in particular is the possibility that Rodgers intends to keep his back 4 defensive line where it is, and never push it up, and that he actually is out of ideas about how to improve defensive organisation and discipline.

It makes me wonder, is Liverpool and the pressure that comes with it, really the best place for a talented young manager to learn? Perhaps the spotlight is blinding him a little and the inability to breathe inhibiting him. At times it seems like he just needs a devil's advocate to grill him and keep his decision making objective and to share the burden of making tough decisions.

This is a well reasoned post. But it doesn't take into account one important caveat that everyone involved in competitive football will swear to.

Progress isn't linear.

Same manager, same methods, same players more or less, can perform like lions one season, and lambs the next. Even without massive changes in personnel.

Shanks - 1st, 7th, 1st, 5th
Rafa at Valencia - 1st, 5th, 1st
Ferguson at United - 11th, 2nd, 11th, 13th
Houllier at Liverpool - 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 5th

It would be great if progress was linear. But it's not. What we can look at is the way the manager wants to play the game, and if it is congruent with what the best teams have done.

Are there questions over Rodgers? Yes. Even from me.
Are they unanswerable? No. Last season he figured out the attack. This season he figured out the defence (after some time). Next season? Who knows. Maybe he can marry the two together. Maybe he can't.
Should he be replaced? Technically, no. Not if we're the club we say we are, not if we are the supporters we claim to be. But who knows what FSG are thinking?
Does he need to improve? Certain aspects - mostly management - yes. His coaching is sound. His playing style is sound. His management is good when it's good, but bad when it's bad. Thankfully, it's not something set in stone.

Which brings me to another point. Football isn't set in stone. It never has been, it never will be. Next season isn't a continuation of this. It's a whole new programme. Nothing that happens this season will really influence next season, on the field. If there is any justice in the world, Rodgers will be the manager at the start of it, with two proper goalscorers, and his bollocks back on display - "Here we are lads and lasses - we attack with speed, we play it on the ground, and if you can stop us, fair play to you".

If he gets that attitude back, and it filters back into the team, then we are back in business.

[slimbo]

Well someone bottled it, the question is who? We essentially lose two players (Suarez, Agger) from a squad that almost wins the title, have 120mil to spend and look as lost as we have in a while. And we're not even sure who is responsible. The transfer committee or Rodgers? That in itself needs to be sorted.

[SerbianScouser]

Well someone bottled it, the question is who? We essentially lose two players (Suarez, Agger) from a squad that almost wins the title, have 120mil to spend and look as lost as we have in a while. And we're not even sure who is responsible. The transfer committee or Rodgers? That in itself needs to be sorted.

We also lost the second best striker in the league last season for 80% of the season.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Well someone bottled it, the question is who? We essentially lose two players (Suarez, Agger) from a squad that almost wins the title, have 120mil to spend and look as lost as we have in a while. And we're not even sure who is responsible. The transfer committee or Rodgers? That in itself needs to be sorted.

We lost three though. We also lost Sturridge to injury. It's one thing to struggle with just Sturridge after Suarez left. Questions definitely to be asked then. But to struggle when your 20-goal striker ALSO gets injured? That's a burden for any manager.

[rscanderlech]

You clearly haven`t watched us since mid-December till mid-March. Our underlying numbers were good as of any other team in the league on both sides of the ball not to mention we won 10 out of 13 games so we were clearly doing something right. As for `we just added another defender at the back`, why does it matter? Apparently he doesn`t learn from his mistakes but he managed for a prolonged period of time to keep us defensively solid - 14 goals conceded in the last 17 games is a decent defensive record that would always allow you to compete up top compared to last season`s defensive shambles of 1.34 goals conceded per game.

I conceded that we had an excellent period in that interval you mention. What you're saying is that for a 3-month period we did very well. Out of a season that lasts 9. So that's one third of the season. And in that one third of a season which was admittedly good, we played quite a number of weak teams and only scraped past them.

Although I respect your opinion, I do think it matters that when our manager has spent his coaching career compiling and refining a dossier numbering some 200-odd pages which details his vision of how to build a footballing dynasty and which is founded tactically upon two systems, 4-3-3 and 4-4-2 (diamond), that after spending around £60m on defenders, he hasn't managed to put a back four together and resorted to scrapping significant portions of this meticulously-worked dossier by introducing a new system with a back 3. That's pretty damning, although we can agree at the same time that it must have taken courage to conceive a new system and to implement it. However, it begs many questions: why did he have to scrap his long-held idea about having a back four? why did it not work in practice? why did it take him so long to realise? what is so complicated about putting a back 4 together even in the desired system when other managers manage to do it? (Is it because of 'committee' transfers, like Mignolet, not being suited to the system he wants, or not?)

I like Rodgers but there are clearly problems which won't just iron themselves out. He is certainly not a world class manager at the moment. He has some real strengths and some other weaknesses and I have a hunch that both his strength and his weakness is that he is a theorist, or, to put it more precisely, he does not have a properly wired and efficient feedback mechanism from theory to practice, i.e. adjusting decisions like a scientist according to the data that prove or disprove his theory. People often cite Bielsa as being another of those coaches. Not that he can't grow out of that.

[PhaseOfPlay]

I conceded that we had an excellent period in that interval you mention. What you're saying is that for a 3-month period we did very well. Out of a season that lasts 9. So that's one third of the season. And in that one third of a season which was admittedly good, we played quite a number of weak teams and only scraped past them.

Although I respect your opinion, I do think it matters that when our manager has spent his coaching career compiling and refining a dossier numbering some 200-odd pages which details his vision of how to build a footballing dynasty and which is founded tactically upon two systems, 4-3-3 and 4-4-2 (diamond), that after spending around £60m on defenders, he hasn't managed to put a back four together and resorted to scrapping significant portions of this meticulously-worked dossier by introducing a new system with a back 3. That's pretty damning, although we can agree at the same time that it must have taken courage to conceive a new system and to implement it. However, it begs many questions: why did he have to scrap his long-held idea about having a back four? why did it not work in practice? why did it take him so long to realise? what is so complicated about putting a back 4 together even in the desired system when other managers manage to do it? (Is it because of 'committee' transfers, like Mignolet, not being suited to the system he wants, or not?)

I like Rodgers but there are clearly problems which won't just iron themselves out. He is certainly not a world class manager at the moment. He has some real strengths and some other weaknesses and I have a hunch that both his strength and his weakness is that he is a theorist, or, to put it more precisely, he does not have a properly wired and efficient feedback mechanism from theory to practice, i.e. adjusting decisions like a scientist according to the data that prove or disprove his theory. People often cite Bielsa as being another of those coaches. Not that he can't grow out of that.

Have you seen the dossier?

If not, how do you know what information it contains?

[Rob Dylan]

This is a well reasoned post. But it doesn't take into account one important caveat that everyone involved in competitive football will swear to.

Progress isn't linear.

Same manager, same methods, same players more or less, can perform like lions one season, and lambs the next. Even without massive changes in personnel.

Shanks - 1st, 7th, 1st, 5th
Rafa at Valencia - 1st, 5th, 1st
Ferguson at United - 11th, 2nd, 11th, 13th
Houllier at Liverpool - 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 5th

It would be great if progress was linear. But it's not. What we can look at is the way the manager wants to play the game, and if it is congruent with what the best teams have done.

Are there questions over Rodgers? Yes. Even from me.
Are they unanswerable? No. Last season he figured out the attack. This season he figured out the defence (after some time). Next season? Who knows. Maybe he can marry the two together. Maybe he can't.
Should he be replaced? Technically, no. Not if we're the club we say we are, not if we are the supporters we claim to be. But who knows what FSG are thinking?
Does he need to improve? Certain aspects - mostly management - yes. His coaching is sound. His playing style is sound. His management is good when it's good, but bad when it's bad. Thankfully, it's not something set in stone.

Which brings me to another point. Football isn't set in stone. It never has been, it never will be. Next season isn't a continuation of this. It's a whole new programme. Nothing that happens this season will really influence next season, on the field. If there is any justice in the world, Rodgers will be the manager at the start of it, with two proper goalscorers, and his bollocks back on display - "Here we are lads and lasses - we attack with speed, we play it on the ground, and if you can stop us, fair play to you".

If he gets that attitude back, and it filters back into the team, then we are back in business.

Could you e-mail this to Brendan?

[rscanderlech]

You make a good point that I ignored entirely and which certainly makes me rethink things.

However, it doesn't deal with the other issue which is that Rodgers often repeats decisions - management decisions, to use your words - which haven't worked in the past for him. How do you deal with that? Is it solvable internally, i.e. within the person of Rodgers, or does every manager require a devil's advocate of an assistant manager as i suggested (I'm not saying that Colin Pascoe isn't fulfilling that function), or both? Is it likely to be solved?

Just to clarify, I am not as negative about Rodgers's future here as this discussion might make it seem. I think that there is potential for him to win stuff here.

[rscanderlech]

Have you seen the dossier?

If not, how do you know what information it contains?

I can't remember where, but I read in an article that the two formations in his dossier are 4-4-2 diamond and 4-3-3. I'll look for it. I hope sincerely that it wasn't in some tabloid.

[afc tukrish]

Progress isn't linear.

Especially not in a season immediately following a World Cup...

[alonsoisared]

Brilliant OP and this is bang on as well. 'Bottling' it in the Chelsea game would've been to go into our shell and abandon our normal way of playing which had brought us to the top of the table in the first place (especially as we're are terrible at trying to play for a draw). I can't understand people comparing that Chelsea match with the recent Man Utd and Villa games - we didn't bottle it, panic or fall apart. We played our normal game, we were positive without being reckless - yes we lacked a little spark because we were missing Sturridge and Henderson, but the game was in our control coming up to half time. Where we failed was our inability to break them down, but we were up against an extremely well-organised defence and they had no incentive to attack once they went ahead. But we didn't panic - if anything we were maybe too calm and methodical. Sometimes it happens, even the best attacking teams can struggle to break a team like that down (look at Barca against Chelsea). And then the Palace game, there was an element of panic in those last 10 minutes but that was the players, it wasn't the manager panicking, we'd been controlling the game with ease and there had been no threat whatsoever from Palace.

I think the way we approached all those games in our winning run shows that Rodgers and the team did not 'bottle' anything and had the right mentality - we played with confidence, and when things got difficult we just kept going and didn't panic. We showed calmness and determination, and belief in our ability to win no matter what.

I'd wanted to write something about last season but like you, I just find it too painful. I probably think about it every day. For it to happen the way it did, with Gerrard's slip and everything, was just unbelievable. I'd rather have lost to City than have lost it the way we did. Think I insulated myself a bit from the disappointment by not really thinking seriously that we were going to do it until after the Norwich game. But when you think about how amazing it would have been to do it the way we (almost) did - the football we played, the unexpected nature of it, Gerrard finally winning a title, and 25 years after Hillsborough - it almost couldn't have been any more perfect. It wouldn't have been the greatest Liverpool team to win a title, but in many ways it would've been the most special title win in our history.

Has to be said though, people talk like we threw away a 10-point lead or something, but the fact that we had to win 11 games in a row just to get to top spot, and the fact that just one defeat was enough to take it out of our hands, shows how fragile our position actually was. Yes we were five points clear with three games left - but City had four left, so it was effectively only two points. And something which is often overlooked is how good City were at the end - they won their last five games and we didn't. That was the difference.

So I don't go along with this whole idea of the manager (or team) 'bottling it' or not being a 'winner' - We had a winning mentality for 11 straight games (and they were not all easy), and nobody had predicted we would get anywhere near the title. The whole thing just turned on one piece of outrageously bad luck, at the worst possible time.

thanks mate, good post. Like yourself I probably think about it every day, it really was the cruellest way to lose out. You couldn't have made it up. Also spot on about City, a lot of people say our competition wasn't great but the way they wrapped it up was very impressive. Palace and Everton away were two potential slip ups (many wondered if we might wrap the title up at palace as a result) and that was what we had to hang on to after the chelsea game.

Part of me wonders what might have happened if we were the late kickoff that day instead of city...but you only end up driving yourself mad!

[PhaseOfPlay]

You make a good point that I ignored entirely and which certainly makes me rethink things.

However, it doesn't deal with the other issue which is that Rodgers often repeats decisions - management decisions, to use your words - which haven't worked in the past for him. How do you deal with that? Is it solvable internally, i.e. within the person of Rodgers, or does every manager require a devil's advocate of an assistant manager as i suggested (I'm not saying that Colin Pascoe isn't fulfilling that function), or both? Is it likely to be solved?

Just to clarify, I am not as negative about Rodgers's future here as this discussion might make it seem. I think that there is potential for him to win stuff here.

It just requires self-reflection. Any good coach worth their salt will look back on their decisions after a season and will fix the bad and try to repeat the good. You don't need a devil's advocate, because at his level there are plenty of those in the media and in some circles of the support. Good coaches are generally their own worst critics anyway. What he needs to do more, in my opinion, is to not worry about the other teams so much. He's not that kind of coach. Just stick to his plan, play it always, and let the chips fall where they may. If he really believes that skill outperforms athleticism, then he has to go that way. That's what Wenger has been doing for over a decade, and what Ferguson did for two. He needs to learn from those examples.

[rscanderlech]

It just requires self-reflection. Any good coach worth their salt will look back on their decisions after a season and will fix the bad and try to repeat the good. You don't need a devil's advocate, because at his level there are plenty of those in the media and in some circles of the support. Good coaches are generally their own worst critics anyway. What he needs to do more, in my opinion, is to not worry about the other teams so much. He's not that kind of coach. Just stick to his plan, play it always, and let the chips fall where they may. If he really believes that skill outperforms athleticism, then he has to go that way. That's what Wenger has been doing for over a decade, and what Ferguson did for two. He needs to learn from those examples.

Well he has been a football manager/head coach for 7 years now with plenty of coaching experience prior to that, so it's time he realises this and sticks to it.

On the dossier, the only source I can find is the Daily M's Matt Lawton, so I retract any dossier and back 3-related statements. It still bemuses me how greatly he has struggled to get a back 4 working though. And I still can't understand what he is planning for the defence in the long term.

[PhaseOfPlay]

I can't remember where, but I read in an article that the two formations in his dossier are 4-4-2 diamond and 4-3-3. I'll look for it. I hope sincerely that it wasn't in some tabloid.

I was hoping you had a link, because I'd love to see it too

But the point I was actually going to make, is that a lot of modern coaches have them. All they are, are documents outlining your philosophy, your preferred formations, how you want to train teams, what drills you would use, how you would organise pre-season, how you would organise the season itself, your preferred club structure, and maybe even player profiles for the positions in your preferred system. It might stretch to 180-200 pages, but most of those would be diagrams and drills. I did one when I did my UEFA B, and that was back in 2003. It was one of the tasks on the course. So it's not something new - Rodgers probably just went a bit further in it than most. But at the same time, it's not a binding agreement, and it's probably updated regularly. People are making too much of the formation stuff, and too much of the change of style. But neither this season nor last season went against Rodgers principles of play. His principles of play are very obvious - width, mobility, penetration, pressure and balance. His playing style is to play to feet unless there's a through-ball or direct ball on. When we played long passes last season, it was Gerrard playing to feet, not just whacking it behind the defence and hoping the forwards could outrun the opposition. There is nothing in his principles of play that have changed. Formations are not the principles, or the philosophy, or the system. They are only the skeleton on which all of that hangs. We had 55.5% possession per game last season, 17 shots per game, and 6.8 shots on target per game (top teams should be aiming for 6 or more). This season we have 15.4 shots per game, 55% possession and 5 shots on target per game. Small differences, but not enough to say there was a massive change of philosophy. The ideas are the same. How they are dressed up from season to season might change, but that's what coaching is - adapting to your team without changing the central idea of how you want to play.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Well he has been a football manager/head coach for 7 years now with plenty of coaching experience prior to that, so it's time he realises this and sticks to it.

On the dossier, the only source I can find is the Daily M's Matt Lawton, so I retract any dossier and back 3-related statements. It still bemuses me how greatly he has struggled to get a back 4 working though. And I still can't understand what he is planning for the defence in the long term.

He can't find the balance between how the back four sets up in possession, and how it sets up out of possession. That's why the back three works well for him, because it removes the doubt. Our centre halves split ridiculously wide for the English league, which isolates every central defender, and creates a huge gap in the middle. The back three negates that gap.  A traditional back four is quite compact (look at Chelsea against Arsenal, there was no more than 7 yards between them at times when they lost the ball), and if Rodgers was to do that, he would lose the fullbacks from his game plan, because they wouldn't be able to push up so high and wide. If he sorts that part out, his back fours would look as good as any (and in fact, if I remember correctly, his best back four was when Carra came back into the side and we stopped splitting the backs, in the second half of the first season).

[rscanderlech]

He can't find the balance between how the back four sets up in possession, and how it sets up out of possession. That's why the back three works well for him, because it removes the doubt. Our centre halves split ridiculously wide for the English league, which isolates every central defender, and creates a huge gap in the middle. The back three negates that gap.  A traditional back four is quite compact (look at Chelsea against Arsenal, there was no more than 7 yards between them at times when they lost the ball), and if Rodgers was to do that, he would lose the fullbacks from his game plan, because they wouldn't be able to push up so high and wide. If he sorts that part out, his back fours would look as good as any (and in fact, if I remember correctly, his best back four was when Carra came back into the side and we stopped splitting the backs, in the second half of the first season).

Thanks for the reply. So what if you have a GK who is able to be the sweeper and rush out (which I understand that we don't necessarily have) and have CBs comfortable in one-on-ones off the ball in a high defensive line and comfortable playing out of defence (perhaps we lack one such CB) and a player like Lucas in front of them, then is the splitting of the CBs alright, in theory, even in the PL?

[PhaseOfPlay]

Thanks for the reply. So what if you have a GK who is able to be the sweeper and rush out (which I understand that we don't necessarily have) and have CBs comfortable in one-on-ones off the ball in a high defensive line and comfortable playing out of defence (perhaps we lack one such CB) and a player like Lucas in front of them, then is the splitting of the CBs alright, in theory, even in the PL?

Yep, but the DM has to be as comfortable playing BEHIND the defenders as he is in front of them. Lucas does the shielding part great, but he doesn't seem as comfortable dropping in all the way. The sweeper/keeper could help, for sure. But both central defenders then have to be happy to sit on the halfway line and not drop off at the first loss of possession

[Kopenhagen]

Yep, but the DM has to be as comfortable playing BEHIND the defenders as he is in front of them. Lucas does the shielding part great, but he doesn't seem as comfortable dropping in all the way. The sweeper/keeper could help, for sure. But both central defenders then have to be happy to sit on the halfway line and not drop off at the first loss of possession

We'd have to replace Skrtel, then, and we know how much Rodgers rates Martin.

[rscanderlech]

Yep, but the DM has to be as comfortable playing BEHIND the defenders as he is in front of them. Lucas does the shielding part great, but he doesn't seem as comfortable dropping in all the way. The sweeper/keeper could help, for sure. But both central defenders then have to be happy to sit on the halfway line and not drop off at the first loss of possession

Right, then one has to ask: 1. Whether all of this is agreed upon by Rodgers, or some other solution.
2. If so - and I imagine that he sees this and agrees that we haven't got all of the necessary playing staff to get the defence working how he wants - why have the various parties represented at the transfer committee which together constitute LFC, failed to ensure that we have the players to do this? (That includes Rodgers, FSG's director, scouts, Ian Ayre...) I think you have to agree that collectively it's shocking that in 3 years they still haven't managed this despite signing 4 CB's, a GK, an LB and numerous midfielders in that time!

[PhaseOfPlay]

Right, then one has to ask: 1. Whether all of this is agreed upon by Rodgers, or some other solution.
2. If so - and I imagine that he sees this and agrees that we haven't got all of the necessary playing staff to get the defence working how he wants - why have the various parties represented at the transfer committee which together constitute LFC, failed to ensure that we have the players to do this? (That includes Rodgers, FSG's director, scouts, Ian Ayre...) I think you have to agree that collectively it's shocking that in 3 years they still haven't managed this despite signing 4 CB's, a GK, an LB and numerous midfielders in that time!

Because it's a committee, not a top-down organisation. Everyone has a say. By some reports, everyone has veto on everyone else, almost. Rodgers wanted Williams, it got shot down. He is rumoured to have not wanted Sakho, but the transfer committee thought better. This is what happens with a diluted leadership. If I was the chairman, I'd tell Rodgers that we would get him the TYPES of player he wants, but we select the actual targets, and he does what he does best - coaches them. Otherwise, give him the power to scout his own targets, and then just assess each one for ease of resale (if they don't work out or if he gets sacked), and maintain a veto for whichever targets don't fit the bill. That way, he gets players that fit his style, but that don't break the bank if the deal goes wrong.

[rscanderlech]

Because it's a committee, not a top-down organisation. Everyone has a say. By some reports, everyone has veto on everyone else, almost. Rodgers wanted Williams, it got shot down. He is rumoured to have not wanted Sakho, but the transfer committee thought better. This is what happens with a diluted leadership. If I was the chairman, I'd tell Rodgers that we would get him the TYPES of player he wants, but we select the actual targets, and he does what he does best - coaches them. Otherwise, give him the power to scout his own targets, and then just assess each one for ease of resale (if they don't work out or if he gets sacked), and maintain a veto for whichever targets don't fit the bill. That way, he gets players that fit his style, but that don't break the bank if the deal goes wrong.

So I guess that even the defensive troubles can be whittled down to problems with our bizarre player recruitment setup. 

[JackWard33]

Great OP thanks for writing it.

It's a bold attempt to change the narrative - and of course it's correct.

The problem is this thread will go in one of two directions.
Either it'll turn into a debate about our transfers and how badly wrong we've gotten them
OR the usual posters will rock up to tell you Rodgers isn't a winner and they can prove it because he hasn't won all the football games

Sadly LFC fans and the majority of posters on this board have got themselves into a ridiculously negative mindset about everything associated with the club - it's sad to see but it appears to be pretty ingrained.
A lot of the time now anything that happens that's positive with the team (like our recent run) is dismissed as luck (witness the endless digs about Rodgers 'stumbling' into a formation) and anything negative is treated as cast iron proof of the previously held belief that the club is badly run and the manager is a fraud

Oh and finally character is so ridiculously over rated by the sports media and armchair fans alike
It's a factor in sports of course but most football matches are won and lost either because one team is better than the other (either on that day or in a macro sense) or due to luck. It's pretty rare one team 'wants it more' or another team 'bottles it'.
It's one of those things that makes great narrative on a TV show but (for example) the teams with the biggest wage bills don't win the title year after year due to 'bottle' or 'wanting it' .. it's due to having more talent

[PhaseOfPlay]

So I guess that even the defensive troubles can be whittled down to problems with our bizarre player recruitment setup. 

I think some of it is a case of Rodgers either not sure of how he wants to work, or not sure where to look for what he wants.

A smart, visionary scout or DoF would be able to say to him "Write out the technical and physical profiles of your perfect formation starting 11". And from that you buy your players, plus the rotations in the key positions.

I don't know if we'd look for that kind of person though.

[rscanderlech]

I think some of it is a case of Rodgers either not sure of how he wants to work, or not sure where to look for what he wants.

Yes at least one of the two has to be true, in addition to the known problems with player recruitment.

Now when I think of it, though, imagine if in a committee of 6 or so people, everyone has a veto. That would drive you nuts all summer, and you probably would start compromising massively on the profile of player you want just to avoid getting vetoed and ensure that you have 25 players by September!

[PhaseOfPlay]

Yes at least one of the two has to be true, in addition to the known problems with player recruitment.

Now when I think of it, though, imagine if in a committee of 6 or so people, everyone has a veto. That would drive you nuts all summer, and you probably would start compromising massively on the profile of player you want just to avoid getting vetoed and ensure that you have 25 players by September!

The committee is a great set up for discussing ideas and getting extra information. But not so good for quick-decision making. Change that aspect of it, and I think we'd move faster, better, and more productively.

[rscanderlech]

The committee is a great set up for discussing ideas and getting extra information. But not so good for quick-decision making. Change that aspect of it, and I think we'd move faster, better, and more productively.

Thanks for indulging me, Mr Play!

[Le_Mot_Juste]

This is a well reasoned post. But it doesn't take into account one important caveat that everyone involved in competitive football will swear to.

Progress isn't linear.

Same manager, same methods, same players more or less, can perform like lions one season, and lambs the next. Even without massive changes in personnel.

Shanks - 1st, 7th, 1st, 5th
Rafa at Valencia - 1st, 5th, 1st
Ferguson at United - 11th, 2nd, 11th, 13th
Houllier at Liverpool - 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 5th

It would be great if progress was linear. But it's not. What we can look at is the way the manager wants to play the game, and if it is congruent with what the best teams have done.

Are there questions over Rodgers? Yes. Even from me.
Are they unanswerable? No. Last season he figured out the attack. This season he figured out the defence (after some time). Next season? Who knows. Maybe he can marry the two together. Maybe he can't.
Should he be replaced? Technically, no. Not if we're the club we say we are, not if we are the supporters we claim to be. But who knows what FSG are thinking?
Does he need to improve? Certain aspects - mostly management - yes. His coaching is sound. His playing style is sound. His management is good when it's good, but bad when it's bad. Thankfully, it's not something set in stone.

Which brings me to another point. Football isn't set in stone. It never has been, it never will be. Next season isn't a continuation of this. It's a whole new programme. Nothing that happens this season will really influence next season, on the field. If there is any justice in the world, Rodgers will be the manager at the start of it, with two proper goalscorers, and his bollocks back on display - "Here we are lads and lasses - we attack with speed, we play it on the ground, and if you can stop us, fair play to you".

If he gets that attitude back, and it filters back into the team, then we are back in business.

Very good post. Actually instilled a bit of positivity back into my outlook. If we fuck up our next two matches, I shall consult this again before posting anything TOO doom-laden.

...Although I'm not fully on board with the "the club we say we are/supporters we say we are" ...sounds very much like what certain supporters at Utd were saying under Moyes...Think there's a bit of a strange myth surrounding the notion that sticking with a manager is 'The Liverpool way'/'The United Way'/'The [insert any club] Way'...Perhaps I'm just too cynical.

But yeah. Great post

[thisyearisouryear]

This is a well reasoned post. But it doesn't take into account one important caveat that everyone involved in competitive football will swear to.

Progress isn't linear.

Same manager, same methods, same players more or less, can perform like lions one season, and lambs the next. Even without massive changes in personnel.

Shanks - 1st, 7th, 1st, 5th
Rafa at Valencia - 1st, 5th, 1st
Ferguson at United - 11th, 2nd, 11th, 13th
Houllier at Liverpool - 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 5th

It would be great if progress was linear. But it's not. What we can look at is the way the manager wants to play the game, and if it is congruent with what the best teams have done.

Are there questions over Rodgers? Yes. Even from me.
Are they unanswerable? No. Last season he figured out the attack. This season he figured out the defence (after some time). Next season? Who knows. Maybe he can marry the two together. Maybe he can't.
Should he be replaced? Technically, no. Not if we're the club we say we are, not if we are the supporters we claim to be. But who knows what FSG are thinking?
Does he need to improve? Certain aspects - mostly management - yes. His coaching is sound. His playing style is sound. His management is good when it's good, but bad when it's bad. Thankfully, it's not something set in stone.

Which brings me to another point. Football isn't set in stone. It never has been, it never will be. Next season isn't a continuation of this. It's a whole new programme. Nothing that happens this season will really influence next season, on the field. If there is any justice in the world, Rodgers will be the manager at the start of it, with two proper goalscorers, and his bollocks back on display - "Here we are lads and lasses - we attack with speed, we play it on the ground, and if you can stop us, fair play to you".

If he gets that attitude back, and it filters back into the team, then we are back in business.

Great post. Rodger's should be given another chance. And hopefully he manages the transfers well enough to get a team of his choice.

[slimbo]

We lost three though. We also lost Sturridge to injury. It's one thing to struggle with just Sturridge after Suarez left. Questions definitely to be asked then. But to struggle when your 20-goal striker ALSO gets injured? That's a burden for any manager.

Which is kind of my point. Who created the burden? Suarez wasn't replaced despite us having the money to spend. Sturridge being injured just magnified the failings.