Topic: The Round and Round and Round the Table we go, Reading's Goalie 0.

[wah00ey]

I am wondering about this as well. What I don´t understand either is this lack of desire to win from the first minute in a lot of games and this has been happening for years now, especially at away games. I had an understanding for that in recent years as there was always so much going on within the club, players knew that they would be going, manager going out, coming in.

But overall if a player doesn´t want to give everything from the first minute in order to win a game against fucking Reading away in our current situation where we wanna get back to top again than he really is probably playing for the wrong club. They should be ashamed for drawing away to a club being rock bottom of the league, no matter the tactics, no matter the manager. Where is the desire to prove that we are better as a team? I always said that a winning mentality comes from quality first but I am talking about the basics here, the basic professionalism when it comes to playing for a club like LFC, it was fucking Reading, bottom of the league with one week rest before...

Maybe the Hillsborough silence affects the players and explains the performance against Reading - ie. lack of urgency from the first minute?  I wonder if there are any stats available for how we perform immediately after memorials like this?

[Mutton Geoff]

Totally agree with the principle of PoP's post. Play your game, the rest will follow.

Do we have a problem tactically at the moment? Part of our current problem seems to be that Sturridge, Suarez, Coutinho and Downing don't all fit. Coutinho was wide left moving in field against West Ham, against Reading he was behind the striker at times. Sturridge was ostenibly wide right but he doesn't stay there. Suarez goes where he wants. Only Downing is a tactical lynchpin.

Henderson suffers somewhat, I think we look better centrally with him there yet there's no doubt he's not as fluid as the players ahead of him.

To me, we look better with Suarez OR Sturridge rather than both. Obviously though you want to play both, who wouldn't! It's a tough one for Brendan.

I have to say right now a front 3 of Downing, Suarez and Coutinho works better than Sturridge for Downing, maybe Downing scores less but he stays in his position, Sturridge comes inside and to put it frankly gets in the way at times for me. I dont think this is all the fault of Sturridge , the signing of Coutinho has added a different dimension to our play and one that suits Suarez far more than Sturridge, maybe it needs some work doing on the training ground, maybe Suarez and Coutinho are more on the same wavelength.

Its for me instant control of the ball and slick movement,  both Suarez and Coutinho have this, but for me Sturridge is still a bit ponderous with his ball control if you like a little robotic in comparison.

Maybe i am expecting too much too soon from Sturridge,  but i often wonder would we have signed him if we got Coutinho first?

Caveat i like Sturridge but for me last saturday  he was at times a Square Peg in a Round Hole. I would myself use Sturridge as an impact sub for a few games.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Phase of plays post is one of the best excuses for not winning a football game. Some people, since this Internet rage of reading and writing too much just wrote for the sake of it.

If you have good chances like us and don't take them blame the players who missed. It's that simple.

Excuse? No. Explanation of the psychology that players can get themselves into that creates anxiety, which then creates forced play and rushed shots and reduces composure in the attacking third? Yes.

As I said, I didn't expect people to agree. But it's not a case of "reading and writing too much". It's a case of seeing it up close with high level players, and helping them to work through it. I know when a player or a team is playing too fast for itself, and I know when a team is tired and I know when a team is disengaged and I know when a team hits all the right notes. I know because I've had nearly 15 years experience of it at all levels and ages as a coach. We played too fast because we were too concerned with the actual scoring of the goals, and not concerned enough with creating quality chances. As a result, apart from the Suarez 1v1 at the start of the game, we didn't really create anything that left McCarthy stranded and outnumbered. He made some good saves, and even one brilliant one, but everything else was a goalkeepers dream - right height, right distance, sighted, and no surprise and no overloads. I agree with whoever it was who said we played too slow in the back and middle thirds and too fast in the attacking third. Our possession and movement was good up to the point where we were looking for the final ball - but we didn't make enough quality final passes, and we forced shots that were as obvious as anything, so the keeper didn't really have to do much for a lot of them.

[PhaseOfPlay]

I have to say right now a front 3 of Downing, Suarez and Coutinho works better than Sturridge for Downing, maybe Downing scores less but he stays in his position, Sturridge comes inside and to put it frankly gets in the way at times for me. I dont think this is all the fault of Sturridge , the signing of Coutinho has added a different dimension to our play and one that suits Suarez far more than Sturridge, maybe it needs some work doing on the training ground, maybe Suarez and Coutinho are more on the same wavelength.

Its for me instant control of the ball and slick movement,  both Suarez and Coutinho have this, but for me Sturridge is still a bit ponderous with his ball control if you like a little robotic in comparison.

Maybe i am expecting too much too soon from Sturridge,  but i often wonder would we have signed him if we got Coutinho first?

Caveat i like Sturridge but for me last saturday  he was at times a Square Peg in a Round Hole. I would myself use Sturridge as an impact sub for a few games.

This makes sense - he seems to have lost his way a bit. He's not a wide striker, for me - his natural tendency is to play central, and he's better as a target player than a creator, and Rodgers needs to look at that and maybe changing the set up to have Suarez and Coutinho either side of him with maybe a Henderson or Allen behind him and then the two holding/passing mids behind that again. We won't get the best out of Sturridge if we put him on the wing.

[Gnurglan]

This makes sense - he seems to have lost his way a bit. He's not a wide striker, for me - his natural tendency is to play central, and he's better as a target player than a creator, and Rodgers needs to look at that and maybe changing the set up to have Suarez and Coutinho either side of him with maybe a Henderson or Allen behind him and then the two holding/passing mids behind that again. We won't get the best out of Sturridge if we put him on the wing.

Understand what you're saying. But put Suarez on the wing and won't we just make him the square peg in the round hole? Same with Henderson/Allen in the advanced midfield role. Wouldn't it be better for us to play for example 4-3-1-2, with Coutinho as the '1', with Suarez and Sturridge up front and Suarez in a free-ish role?

And if we play the front three with two wide players, use Coutinho and Downing/Sterling/Borini/Assaidi, with either Suarez or Sturridge up front?

[PhaseOfPlay]

Understand what you're saying. But put Suarez on the wing and won't we just make him the square peg in the round hole? Same with Henderson/Allen in the advanced midfield role. Wouldn't it be better for us to play for example 4-3-1-2, with Coutinho as the '1', with Suarez and Sturridge up front and Suarez in a free-ish role?

On a practical level, I agree. But we seem wedded in the long term to 4-3-3/4-2-3-1. I would much prefer a 4-3-1-2, because it would get the best out of Suarez/Sturridge/Coutinho, it would give Gerrard more protection because the "3" in midfield would be more defensive than attacking midfielders; it would also allow for more protection of the back four, because Lucas would always have at least one helper. There is a possibility with Suarez' movement that it becomes a 4-3-2-1, but there's nothing wrong with that set-up either. But in the context of where the club seems to want to go, a 4-2-3-1 shape is the most likely outcome, I think?

And if we play the front three with two wide players, use Coutinho and Downing/Sterling/Borini/Assaidi, with either Suarez or Sturridge up front?

That would be more practical but the same issue exists whenever Sturridge has to come on, unless it's a like for like sub with Suarez?

[Mutton Geoff]

This makes sense - he seems to have lost his way a bit. He's not a wide striker, for me - his natural tendency is to play central, and he's better as a target player than a creator, and Rodgers needs to look at that and maybe changing the set up to have Suarez and Coutinho either side of him with maybe a Henderson or Allen behind him and then the two holding/passing mids behind that again. We won't get the best out of Sturridge if we put him on the wing.

I see what you mean but i would rather Suarez as close to Countinho as possible, and having Sturridge in between hampers that perhaps as said Sturridge front one, behind him Coutinho and Suarez both interchanging would work, but we would have no or less width unless Enrique and Glen bombed up the wings a lot more, and that would exposed the defence even more, if you have Gerrard and Lucas in the central  roles. they would need to be more disciplined and stay as holding players for me.

Interesting dilemma but at least now he has the players to juggle with up front.

[PhaseOfPlay]

I see what you mean but i would rather Suarez as close to Countinho as possible, and having Sturridge in between hampers that perhaps as said Sturridge front one, behind him Coutinho and Suarez both interchanging would work, but we would have no or less width unless Enrique and Glen bombed up the wings a lot more, and that would exposed the defence even more, if you have Gerrard and Lucas in the central  roles. they would need to be more disciplined and stay as holding players for me.

Interesting dilemma but at least now he has the players to juggle with up front.

That's the key GS - and that's also a measure of a good manager, isn't it? The ability to effectively juggle resources

[Grand Chilli]

I seem to be flying in the face of popular opinion here, but am I the only person who didn't think their keeper had *that* good a game? Yes he did well, but from memory every save is one I would expect any decent keeper to make. The Suarez blast was the only one that made me really take notice, but actually even that one was almost right at him. (I always think goalies get too much credit for strikers blasting the ball at them, but maybe I'm a bit harsh )

Now whether this is because of bad finishing, bad luck or bad play in that we aren't making more clear-cut chances is another age-old debate...

[Gnurglan]

Apologies if this is taking things off-topic, but...

What do you think Rodgers has in mind? If it's 4-2-3-1/4-3-3, what do you think he's aiming for, with the players we now have? And what do you think he'd like to add in the summer?

[Mutton Geoff]

That's the key GS - and that's also a measure of a good manager, isn't it? The ability to effectively juggle resources

It sure is, a better dilemma to have than just the one option up front, here is one of my ideas.

 i think Coutinho will be the playmaker in a sort of Beardsley mode in Kenny's team, intelligence and great energy, i would also like Stevie to become more of an Alonso style, so we have him Orchestrating  things from deeper areas and Coutinho playing the sort of Gerrard to Suarez's (Torres) role, I know Suarez and Torres have different styles, but Coutinhou operating just behind him might also work.

it is already evident to me that Stevie has played a slightly deeper role since Coutinho got in the side, but i would prefer him to maintain that rather than seek to join up with the Strikers too often, good though he is,  that is a very tasking role and given his age maybe too much in the next season or two, so why not think ahead and solve the problem of where Stevie plays and his role now.

Edit Coutinho also reminds me of the lad who played us off the park for Valencia when Rafa was the manager of them,  getting old so just now cannot remember his name but last club i saw him with was Benfica.

[Vulmea]

I am wondering about this as well. What I don´t understand either is this lack of desire to win from the first minute in a lot of games and this has been happening for years now, especially at away games. I had an understanding for that in recent years as there was always so much going on within the club, players knew that they would be going, manager going out, coming in.

But overall if a player doesn´t want to give everything from the first minute in order to win a game against fucking Reading away in our current situation where we wanna get back to top again than he really is probably playing for the wrong club. They should be ashamed for drawing away to a club being rock bottom of the league, no matter the tactics, no matter the manager. Where is the desire to prove that we are better as a team? I always said that a winning mentality comes from quality first but I am talking about the basics here, the basic professionalism when it comes to playing for a club like LFC, it was fucking Reading, bottom of the league with one week rest before...

the whole psychology thing is a tough one - difficult to prove - playing too fast trying to force a game is a problem - we've seen several games when we look anxious in front of goal or the game just doesn't flow - WBA at home was another were the 'keeper' had a blinder - when in actual fact we made him look good

we seem to lack purpose when trying to slow the game or keep the ball

we also can't close out a game

our set piece defending is poor

They all point to a lack of focus - all things you could associate with a team thats still struggling to understand what its being asked to do - one of my own pet theories is for too long they were also given a free pass - until we bought Sturridge we had the excuses of a squad short of strikers, of a new manager , a new style of play, we'd been told it would take time to work - all of these for me gave the players the opportunity to not fully commit to the cause - to keep the ball but without really understanding why - ok it was good if things went well but if they didn't the wheels quickly came off ............Sterling is a particular example of this for me he's contributed next to nothing, the expectation was minimal but he's been given experience which should stand him in good stead next year - (how do you resolve that with wanting to win every game?) - we stripped the squad of quality  players like Kuyt and Rodriguez, Bellamy and Carroll which would have earned us points and went instead with Suso, Shelvey, Sterling even Morgan and Yesil and Sinclair on occasions - which sent further messages about rebuilding being more important than results -   the debacle in the summer left us playing catch up with too much to do which has increased the anxiety post January...............the same reasons could have been used to bond the team closer together somebody like Moyes would have used it as a motivation an against the odds type of approach, Suarez seemed to motivate himself that way - but as a club we opted for the softer it'll take time version presumably to lessen the expectation which would be so much greater at Liverpool - its the managers call but it still smacks of writing off this season as transitional - we'll have some new faces next season whatever happens so the advantages of this approach are still questionable unless another 'transitional ' season beckons.

The best approach is certainly not about setting a target of points totals - its about taking each game as it comes - the next game should always be the most important,  for me we didn't take that approach until January (the derby aside) when we started tweaking the system and the personnel to be more effective - injury and further tweaking (probably with next season in mind) banjaxed us again   

[redk84]

Mentioned it on another thread and agree with many on here....its the mentality of this team.

We can score when its scoring for fun....if we manage to get that early goal and add another one then everyone relaxes and takes their chances with abit of confidence. No rushing, no snapping at the shot or trying to hit it as hard as possible without any sort of composure.

Its a panic we show in attack, and defence at times which is more evident the longer games of this type go on.

The solution? Well to not be in a position where we are chasing the season. To have a lot of luck and get the points we deserve early on and we will be a much more confident team next year...if we have another bad start and are chasing the pack again id predict more games like against Reading and West Ham....

We just need that spark, and then with a decent run the confidence will hopefully build a resiliance in the team and then we can really start building for future challenging. Big season next season..

But errrr in terms of the game against Reading? There's not much else to say that hasn't been said in the last couple of years we've seen this sort of display. Unfortunately.

But onwards! Finish the season strong and atleast smash the Bitters

[Vulmea]

Mentioned it on another thread and agree with many on here....its the mentality of this team.
The solution? Well to not be in a position where we are chasing the season. To have a lot of luck and get the points we deserve early on and we will be a much more confident team next year...if we have another bad start and are chasing the pack again id predict more games like against Reading and West Ham....

We just need that spark, and then with a decent run the confidence will hopefully build a resiliance in the team and then we can really start building for future challenging. Big season next season..

I thought the same for a long while - a game where we earn the win, get some momentum build from there - there have been half a dozen games this season where that could have happened but didn't - is it all down to luck - this seasson, last - makes me think now that its deeper than that now - I think we need something more - we need some steel in the side that helps us focus, an aggresive dominant player that ensures we neither feel sorry for ourselves or get edgy  - we have the opportunity to bring in somebody at centre half that can do that -

[PhaseOfPlay]

I thought the same for a long while - a game where we earn the win, get some momentum build from there - there have been half a dozen games this season where that could have happened but didn't - is it all down to luck - this seasson, last - makes me think now that its deeper than that now - I think we need something more - we need some steel in the side that helps us focus, an aggresive dominant player that ensures we neither feel sorry for ourselves or get edgy  - we have the opportunity to bring in somebody at centre half that can do that -

Talked with Geoffstrong about this - this team looks like it needs a Cantona/Vieira/Toure type player (not the position, but the type) - someone who ties everything together. I think when Houllier bought Litmanen, he was thinking of that same thing, but he also had it with McAllister although he was ageing. Rafa had Torres to "round out" the team. We don't have that player yet, but in coaching terms, this player is a "multiplier" - when they are on the field the efforts of everyone rises by a factor of 10. We don't have a multiplier yet, so we are not yet greater than the sum of our parts. My worry is that you can't find this player with stats, so it has to be someone who is scouted for something more than pass completion or goals scored or assists made. We might have to pay a price for him too.

[Draex]

Talked with Geoffstrong about this - this team looks like it needs a Cantona/Vieira/Toure type player (not the position, but the type) - someone who ties everything together. I think when Houllier bought Litmanen, he was thinking of that same thing, but he also had it with McAllister although he was ageing. Rafa had Torres to "round out" the team. We don't have that player yet, but in coaching terms, this player is a "multiplier" - when they are on the field the efforts of everyone rises by a factor of 10. We don't have a multiplier yet, so we are not yet greater than the sum of our parts. My worry is that you can't find this player with stats, so it has to be someone who is scouted for something more than pass completion or goals scored or assists made. We might have to pay a price for him too.

http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=305129.0 ?

[PhaseOfPlay]

http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=305129.0 ?

It's not Gerrard, if you're suggesting that? Gerrard isn't a multiplier. He's a great player and a legend, but he isn't a multiplier.

[El Lobo]

Who do you see as a multiplier, PoP?

Xabi Alonso? Christian Eriksson?

[stewy17]

It's not Gerrard, if you're suggesting that? Gerrard isn't a multiplier. He's a great player and a legend, but he isn't a multiplier.

I don't really understand what you mean by multiplier?

You said that you believe its a player on the pitch who rounds things off and makes the rest of the team up their game? and say Torres was this player but not Gerrard? or Suarez?

If that's the case I'm confused by what you're getting at?

You mention a Cantona, Toure, Viera, Torres type player as a multiplier but not Gerrard? Do you mean not now or not ever? Not being tetchy or argumentative, just unclear as to what you mean by multiplier?

[PhaseOfPlay]

I don't really understand what you mean by multiplier?

You said that you believe its a player on the pitch who rounds things off and makes the rest of the team up their game? and say Torres was this player but not Gerrard? or Suarez?

If that's the case I'm confused by what you're getting at?

You mention a Cantona, Toure, Viera, Torres type player as a multiplier but not Gerrard? Do you mean not now or not ever? Not being tetchy or argumentative, just unclear as to what you mean by multiplier?

Not now. Peak-age Gerrard on this team would have been. But even at peak-age, under Rafa's system, Torres was the player who tied the pieces together. We didn't really challenge for the league until we had Torres, because he gave the system the focal point it needed, and so the purpose of every other player's position was enhanced (or multiplied). Alonso was the GPS, Gerrard was the engine, but Torres was the driver, and lead the way. Ajax had it in the total football sides of the 60's and 70's. They had all the ingredients in Cruyff, Neeskens and Swart, etc. but they needed Vasovic to tie the pressing game together and multiply the purpose of the other positions.

The multiplier isn't a vocal leader or a captain. They can be, but it's not necessary. They are a player whose skills tie the tactical pieces together and enhance the positions of every other area of the pitch. A good example is Dave Mackay at Derby. His ability to slow the game down and find an entry pass as a sweeper helped the rest of the team to define their roles within the system. Another example is Summerbee at City under Mercer and Allison.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Who do you see as a multiplier, PoP?

Xabi Alonso? Christian Eriksson?

I couldn't tell you, but I think it might actually be a defender rather than a midfielder or attacker. Someone who drives us up the field and keeps us in a high line which means we have more compression in the attacking half which means we can press better, which then means we get the ball back quicker, which means more of the ball. We'll know the player if we get him though. It's a key signing for Rodgers, and I hope we get that player in the summer.

[PhaseOfPlay]

My guess is Vertonghen, sadly.

I would agree, but I think Alderweireld could be a good substitute. It's almost certainly going to be a defender, though.

[Mutton Geoff]

Talked with Geoffstrong about this - this team looks like it needs a Cantona/Vieira/Toure type player (not the position, but the type) - someone who ties everything together. I think when Houllier bought Litmanen, he was thinking of that same thing, but he also had it with McAllister although he was ageing. Rafa had Torres to "round out" the team. We don't have that player yet, but in coaching terms, this player is a "multiplier" - when they are on the field the efforts of everyone rises by a factor of 10. We don't have a multiplier yet, so we are not yet greater than the sum of our parts. My worry is that you can't find this player with stats, so it has to be someone who is scouted for something more than pass completion or goals scored or assists made. We might have to pay a price for him too.

So lets take last week with the Barcelona game, is Messi their Multiplier? because they had quality on the pitch in abundance but you still saw a  massive increase in attitude and played with more confidence  when he came on  this also triggers the fans.
 With Cantona love him or hate him he was a terrific players and the one the rest of a great young side looked up to, he demanded the ball and led by example and strength of character.  City have more about them and it seems more determination when Yaya plays, it used to be the same as that with the Gunners and Viera, for me players who strode the pitch like giants amongst men, they demand more from the people around them and get it but they also lead by example.

Not sure if that Pop's take on this but that the way i would describe it, not players that carry the team on their backs as some wrongly use in here but players who when on the pitch lift the whole team inspire confidence and a cannot lose mentality and take the crowd with them.

Stevie is a great player but does he demand excellence from his team mates, he has saved us many times and won games but do you think if he plays we must win and do the team? None of this is a slight on Stevie he is different  type of excellent player.

edit I think possibly the last true Multiplier we  have had here was Souness, similar in every way to Yaya and Viera.

[PhaseOfPlay]

So lets take last week with the Barcelona game, is Messi their Multiplier, because they had quality on the pitch but you still saw a  massive increase in attitude and played with more confidence  when he came on this also this triggers the fans.
 With Cantona love him or hate him he was a terrific players and the one the rest of a great young side looked up to, he demanded the ball and led by example and strength of character.  City have more about them and it seems more determination when Yaya plays, it used to be the same as that with the Gunners and Viera, for me players who strode the pitch like giants amongst men, they demand more from the people around them and get it but they also lead by example.

Not sure if that Pop's take on this but that the way i would describe it, not players that carry the team on their backs as some wrongly use in here but players who when on the pitch lift the whole team inspire confidence and a cannot lose mentality and take the crowd with them.

Stevie is a great player but does he demand excellence from his team mates, he has saved us many times and won games but do you think if he plays we must win and do the team? None of this is a slight on Stevie he is different  type of excellent player.

edit I think possibly the last true Multiplier we  have had here was Souness, similar in every way to Yaya and Viera.

That's exactly it, GS. Not someone who "carries" the team, but whose very presence lifts it. Roy Keane was a lot of things, but he was definitely a mulitiplier. When he lost those powers (when players started to stand up to him), he became surplus to requirements. Celtic had it too with Jimmy Johnstone in the 60's - a player who made the other players play better just by being on the pitch. Keegan was that player for Shanks I think, and as you say, Souness. Although I'd also put Barnes in that frame, perhaps?

[Draex]

That's exactly it, GS. Not someone who "carries" the team, but whose very presence lifts it. Roy Keane was a lot of things, but he was definitely a mulitiplier. When he lost those powers (when players started to stand up to him), he became surplus to requirements. Celtic had it too with Jimmy Johnstone in the 60's - a player who made the other players play better just by being on the pitch. Keegan was that player for Shanks I think, and as you say, Souness. Although I'd also put Barnes in that frame, perhaps?

You see I think Stevie is that player for us - the problem is we've become so reliant on him our complete dynamic flows through him.. If Gerrard has a bad game - the team suffers, if he plays out of his skin then the team will perform. We need to have someone who can provide the catalyst for the team, for all Suarez's brilliance it isn't him.

I'd love us to try and find the next Schweinsteiger - there's something about a bit of German steel in your midfield that makes it all tick.

[dnkw]

It would make sense if it was someone at the back as I could imagine it galvanising us going forward/reducing any concerns in our attackers minds about giving the ball away in advanced positions for fear of the counter-attack.

Someone with the required skillset to affect a tightening of our defense (reading of the game/strength/pace/heading - not asking for much, heh!).

Yeah, we're after a genuine lynchpin here. God knows how much that might cost.

[redtel]

I couldn't tell you, but I think it might actually be a defender rather than a midfielder or attacker. Someone who drives us up the field and keeps us in a high line which means we have more compression in the attacking half which means we can press better, which then means we get the ball back quicker, which means more of the ball. We'll know the player if we get him though. It's a key signing for Rodgers, and I hope we get that player in the summer.

Have to agree on that. Key signing.

I see what you mean about Dave Mackay at Derby and I would think Viera more recently. He was superb at Cardiff in 2001 although he lost out that day. I actually think Lucas was becoming that player for us up to Nov 2011 if you recall how he dominated YaYa Toure in the game before his injury. He was voted MOTM.

I have been searching for reasons as why we look so poor some games and then we have a run where it looks like they are getting it all together. This lack of a multiplier as you have named it is certainly something that may give us the missing link. Just what happens though if this man gets a 4 week layoff at say this stage of the season is a problem if it all depends on him.

I suppose if he binds the team for a lengthy period it should then be able to function without him eventually.
I have no idea where we find this player but we have invested in a scouting network so now is the time they must earn their corn.

[PhaseOfPlay]

You see I think Stevie is that player for us - the problem is we've become so reliant on him our complete dynamic flows through him.. If Gerrard has a bad game - the team suffers, if he plays out of his skin then the team will perform. We need to have someone who can provide the catalyst for the team, for all Suarez's brilliance it isn't him.

I'd love us to try and find the next Schweinsteiger - there's something about a bit of German steel in your midfield that makes it all tick.

It's not Gerrard for the simple fact that his presence on the field doesn't make us play better - we don't function as well if he doesn't play well, which is the opposite, almost, of a multiplier. If Messi doesn't play well, Barca still play well just by his very presence on the field. Suarez is too selfish (in the footballing sense) to be that player. Gerrard is more of a go-to player than a multiplier. We're not talking leadership here, I have to stress that. We're talking in tactical terms. It is almost a "missing piece" scenario, but it's more than that. It's the idea that as long as that player is on the field, the team will have a structure. They don't have to make things happen by themselves, but they do keep the game moving the way the system is supposed to move. They are almost always simple players, and very effective in their simplicity. Gerrard is not a simple player. He sees the complicated pass as much as the simple one. It's not Lucas either, although it looked like it could have been. He doesn't have the tactical presence required.

[Kop10]

I couldn't tell you, but I think it might actually be a defender rather than a midfielder or attacker. Someone who drives us up the field and keeps us in a high line which means we have more compression in the attacking half which means we can press better, which then means we get the ball back quicker, which means more of the ball. We'll know the player if we get him though. It's a key signing for Rodgers, and I hope we get that player in the summer.

Hello PoP,

If I understand you correctly this multiplier you speak of will, by his sole inclusion, give Brendan the capability of altering our tactics to get more out of the team as a whole.

You know what? I really think this might be what's missing with us from being really special right now. Maybe the defender you mention can do this.

Sort of like Sigurdsson's signing for Brendan's Swansea last year took them to a new level in the way he interpreted his role as the centre of the attacking 3, or how Beausejour's signing transformed Wigan's season by allowing them to switch formations entirely to a 3-5-2.

[Mutton Geoff]

You see I think Stevie is that player for us - the problem is we've become so reliant on him our complete dynamic flows through him.. If Gerrard has a bad game - the team suffers, if he plays out of his skin then the team will perform. We need to have someone who can provide the catalyst for the team, for all Suarez's brilliance it isn't him.

I'd love us to try and find the next Schweinsteiger - there's something about a bit of German steel in your midfield that makes it all tick.

watch out you might be called a hipster, quoting a lad in the bundesliga is that right Pop

I must admit Pop i was wondering about Barnes with the Evans team, but thought Souness was a better option, yes Keegan, for Shanks but also maybe our colossus  at the back Rowdy in the early days.

[Vulmea]

So lets take last week with the Barcelona game, is Messi their Multiplier? because they had quality on the pitch in abundance but you still saw a  massive increase in attitude and played with more confidence  when he came on  this also triggers the fans.
 With Cantona love him or hate him he was a terrific players and the one the rest of a great young side looked up to, he demanded the ball and led by example and strength of character.  City have more about them and it seems more determination when Yaya plays, it used to be the same as that with the Gunners and Viera, for me players who strode the pitch like giants amongst men, they demand more from the people around them and get it but they also lead by example.

Not sure if that Pop's take on this but that the way i would describe it, not players that carry the team on their backs as some wrongly use in here but players who when on the pitch lift the whole team inspire confidence and a cannot lose mentality and take the crowd with them.

Stevie is a great player but does he demand excellence from his team mates, he has saved us many times and won games but do you think if he plays we must win and do the team? None of this is a slight on Stevie he is different  type of excellent player.

edit I think possibly the last true Multiplier we  have had here was Souness, similar in every way to Yaya and Viera.

its interesting because it can be accomplished by different types of player - you couldn't compare cantona and keane as players except they both came with an unshakable belief in themselves - so part of the equation is that belief and transmitting that belief to others - another part is the focus it brings - whether that is providing a channel and purpose for the ball - ie the old phrase if in doubt give it to Barnes - suddenly there is a purpose to everybodies play or a third element leadership  - an assertive focus on achieving your goals - doesn't matter about the ref, the post, the conditions, the injuries, the opposition its all about what we do - single minded, brook no denial focus.

Gerrard is inspirational -  a fantastic player - for me the best all round midfielder of his generation - but he lacks the arrogance - his self confidence has grown but I still dont think he knows how good he is or was - if he did he would never have been arsed about medals - he always used to wear his heart on his sleeve  - too passionate - often carried away in his own game - you can see his disapointment, you can see his belief ebb and flow - in that famed Olympiacos game the lad had all but given up in the first half it was the rest of the team that lifted him - I think he's been unlucky in one respect for so much of his career he's needed a leader rather than being the leader - he's grown into the role and he's much better at it now than he was but for me he wasnt a natural leader on the pitch just an exeptional player.

So Gerrard and Barnes to an extent by their ability can lift players, they can provide focus for play but that play is usually through their individual brillance rather than team play but I'm not sure either was a leader. Sami was different again a calm head, a dominant figure, he gave a belief in our defence being solid, unbreakable, knowing you wont concede..........a keeper in form can give the same edge - its part of the equation

The sheer ability of Messi or Ronaldo come to that must lift a sides belief - having many good players, highly paid players  must lift a sides belief - just as failing to buy a striker must detract from it, as must facing a side packed with stars - but for me we need the type of player that says *uck whether Messi plays or not, *uck that we didn't buy a striker. *uck the ref, the post, the papers and whatever else is going on  - we go out and play the best we can, everybody, no excuses - its not Reading or United its the opposition - its not a semi final or a mid week league fixture its the next match -  its more about inner belief and focus than talent - often of course the two go hand in hand - they feed off each other but that player also needs to pull others with him - the team need to be aware what  a nightmare Keane will be if you dont focus, aware that Cantona is on the traning pitch an hour longer than everybody else so why aren't you putting the graft in - these are individuals that bind a team together, give them purpose, belief and focus and then you get back a result bigger than the sum of the individual parts

tough gig for somebody eh?

[woof]

It's funny - I honestly believed that it was our mentality which cost us the game. But PoP quite right put it: we "rushed" the game and wanted to win badly and dropped the first principles the players were told to do. That's why it look too individualistic and not a team play. When we were carving teams up, we played with purpose, incision and poise. Against the bottom side, we looked nonplussed most of the match until the introduction of Downing.

[steveeastend]

Talked with Geoffstrong about this - this team looks like it needs a Cantona/Vieira/Toure type player (not the position, but the type)

We definitely need a player like that and I think we are exactly at the point where ManU has been right before the signed Cantona. Young and talented players coming through, a inconstitent squad not being able to lead by example and overall a couple of signings away from being able to have a go for the top.

The thing is though that this issue is rooting to the very basics of our problem. It´s about breaking up the current hierachy which couldn´t prove to be functioning in the way that it would make us winning on a regular basis, no matter the mananger. But we did everything to avoid it as the presence and overall importance for the club is so overwhelmed by Gerrard and Carra that players are having a hard time to step up even if they want to (take more responsibility). But it´s our own fault, we forced it, we refused to sign players for Gerrards position and he is untouchable, same with center back. Now as they are beginning to fade away, there is nobody around to step in other than prospects for the future.

But this problem isn´t new, it´s around for quite some time now and I am wondering how we wanna address it. Signing talents or squad players only? In fact we need one or two top players, leaders like as you mentioned Cantona or Toure.

[Vulmea]

It's not Gerrard for the simple fact that his presence on the field doesn't make us play better - we don't function as well if he doesn't play well, which is the opposite, almost, of a multiplier. If Messi doesn't play well, Barca still play well just by his very presence on the field. Suarez is too selfish (in the footballing sense) to be that player. Gerrard is more of a go-to player than a multiplier. We're not talking leadership here, I have to stress that. We're talking in tactical terms. It is almost a "missing piece" scenario, but it's more than that. It's the idea that as long as that player is on the field, the team will have a structure. They don't have to make things happen by themselves, but they do keep the game moving the way the system is supposed to move. They are almost always simple players, and very effective in their simplicity. Gerrard is not a simple player. He sees the complicated pass as much as the simple one. It's not Lucas either, although it looked like it could have been. He doesn't have the tactical presence required.

Intersting you say its not leadership - but Vasovic,  Keane and Cantona where exactly that - they were not merely a focus for play or a structure - they carried an unquenchable  belief in what they were doing that meant they were leaders  - Mackay, Souness,and Keegan - all inherant leaders - if its these guys who are holding the fabric together what else are they if not leaders?

Its not necessary for a multiplier to be this you could argue players like Sammy Lee and Cally and Barnes when he switched to the centre joined the pieces together allowed others to work their magic, created a platform for others to excel -unsung heroes that joined the dots but in our case I think we need something more  - we need that beacon to cling to and lead the way home.

[steveeastend]

Gerrard is inspirational -  a fantastic player - for me the best all round midfielder of his generation - but he lacks the arrogance - his self confidence has grown but I still dont think he knows how good he is or was - if he did he would never have been arsed about medals - he always used to wear his heart on his sleeve  - too passionate - often carried away in his own game - you can see his disapointment, you can see his belief ebb and flow - in that famed Olympiacos game the lad had all but given up in the first half it was the rest of the team that lifted him - I think he's been unlucky in one respect for so much of his career he's needed a leader rather than being the leader - he's grown into the role and he's much better at it now than he was but for me he wasnt a natural leader on the pitch just an exeptional player.

There could be a million things said about this but at the end it doesn´t matter as it´s all in the past. Stevie has to look for himself now as his body denies him to be the game changer on a regular basis he used to be, he cannot look for the team although he tries but it´s too much to ask from him at this stage of his career. I think he definitely didn´t lack arrogance but the point is that all the arrogance wouldn´t help him to lead the team the way it should be at the moment as his body is suffering due to age. It´s too much to ask from him.

For sure it´s way too much for Rodgers to handle. The issue is so big that it would take either a van Gaal type of person or somebody with an untouchable status to guide and help Gerrard during his last couple of seasons without stepping on his toes while changing his role to the benefit for the team and open up space for a Cantona/Toure type of player.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Intersting you say its not leadership - but Vasovic,  Keane and Cantona where exactly that - they were not merely a focus for play or a structure - they carried an unquenchable  belief in what they were doing that meant they were leaders  - Mackay, Souness,and Keegan - all inherant leaders - if its these guys who are holding the fabric together what else are they if not leaders?

Its not necessary for a multiplier to be this you could argue players like Sammy Lee and Cally and Barnes when he switched to the centre joined the pieces together allowed others to work their magic, created a platform for others to excel -unsung heroes that joined the dots but in our case I think we need something more  - we need that beacon to cling to and lead the way home.

I probably wasn't clear - I wanted to say that we're not looking for pure leadership on its own - they have to fit the tactics of the team too, and complete the tactical picture. Vinny Jones had the same temperament as Roy Keane, for example, but Keane was the superior player and could actually play a bit. Souness was a born leader, but he understood the Liverpool passing game, so he could "fit" into the picture. So leadership is important, don't misunderstand me - but we're looking for more than just leadership, more than just a talisman. This player has to make the rest of the players want to play 100% every game, just by their presence on the pitch (for Cantona and Keegan, it was by example - Smith was more of a "leader" type than Keegan, but Keegan made things happen for the team. Keane and Souness were leaders, but they still needed a Beckham and Dalglish to be the talents. For me, the mulitplier is that one player that makes the whole team make sense, and often gives the team its identity. They can and usually are a leader, but it's not necessary). I wanted to stress that I wasn't talking about a captain, necessarily, but a leader-without-being-a-leader type of player - for example, Souness would have been Souness with or without a captain's armband. That kind of player.

[DLF]

I probably wasn't clear - I wanted to say that we're not looking for pure leadership on its own - they have to fit the tactics of the team too, and complete the tactical picture.

Do you think that's why Ferguson got Scholes back?

I agree about Gerrard, we have often played better as a team without him.

I often think West Brom in the league cup was our best performance and wonder if Sahin was actually 'the multiplier' that night.  Hmmm.

[abhred]

It's not Gerrard for the simple fact that his presence on the field doesn't make us play better - we don't function as well if he doesn't play well, which is the opposite, almost, of a multiplier. If Messi doesn't play well, Barca still play well just by his very presence on the field. Suarez is too selfish (in the footballing sense) to be that player. Gerrard is more of a go-to player than a multiplier. We're not talking leadership here, I have to stress that. We're talking in tactical terms. It is almost a "missing piece" scenario, but it's more than that. It's the idea that as long as that player is on the field, the team will have a structure. They don't have to make things happen by themselves, but they do keep the game moving the way the system is supposed to move. They are almost always simple players, and very effective in their simplicity. Gerrard is not a simple player. He sees the complicated pass as much as the simple one. It's not Lucas either, although it looked like it could have been. He doesn't have the tactical presence required.

This is such an interesting question that you've brought up. A multiplier. Now that you mention Torres, it just makes so much more sense for Rafa's team. Gerrard, Alonso and Mascherano look great on paper, but we needed that Torres type player to complete it. Someone who'd play on the shoulder, who thrived on the philosophy of getting the ball up as quickly as possible. Dirk wouldn't be as effective on the right either, if Torres wasn't playing in the center.

I'm trying to think of more examples. What do you think Carrick in that United team? Never a player who stands out, but he's been such a glue in that team since he's signed. You sign him and suddenly you have someone who's getting the ball to Rooney and Ronaldo in dangerous spaces, someone who's providing some steel in the middle. They hadn't won the league in 3 years, and they've won 4 out of 6 since signing him, as well as a Champions League. And he's been arguably their best player as they go on to win their 5th since he's signed for them.

What do you think of signing Barry in this context? Was Rafa trying to sign him to be that multiplier, who would glue his tactical plan and put it together?

In terms of us, I agree that a top quality defender could be that player for us, who just fits all the pieces together. I would even think of a midfielder, someone who plays with his head more than all. We have a lot of instinctive players up front in Sturridge, Suarez and Gerrard. Having someone who always plays the right pass would have been great in the last 2 games. Someone like a David Silva.

[TSC]

Excuse? No. Explanation of the psychology that players can get themselves into that creates anxiety, which then creates forced play and rushed shots and reduces composure in the attacking third? Yes.

As I said, I didn't expect people to agree. But it's not a case of "reading and writing too much". It's a case of seeing it up close with high level players, and helping them to work through it. I know when a player or a team is playing too fast for itself, and I know when a team is tired and I know when a team is disengaged and I know when a team hits all the right notes. I know because I've had nearly 15 years experience of it at all levels and ages as a coach. 

Thankfully you didn't say '30 years experience' - had visions that Hodgson had returned there!

[steveeastend]

Do you think that's why Ferguson got Scholes back?

I agree about Gerrard, we have often played better as a team without him.

I often think West Brom in the league cup was our best performance and wonder if Sahin was actually 'the multiplier' that night.  Hmmm.

Sahin never played in this position again.