Topic: Preview: Villa v Liverpool - Sunday 31st March, KO 13.30

[bornandbRED]

They're fucking awful. We should be shitting all over them.

[SweetSilverSevens]

This seems like the ideal team for most on here....

REINA
JOHNSON--CARRA--AGGER--ENRIQUE
LLUCAS
GERRARD--HENDERSON
COUTINHO--------------SUAREZ
STURRIDGE

Suarez/Coutinho are on really good form. So it's either/or with Sturridge/Downing.... but went with Sturridge due to his goal threat.



But my point is, we don't really have to worry about the after-effects of the international break... apart from on Suarez/Agger.

Reina/Carra/Enrique/Lucas/Coutinho didn't play a single minute outside training sessions. Gerrard/Johnson only played one game, having a sufficient break, with enough recovery time. Henderson also only played one game for the U21s. Sturridge only played a cameo role against San Marino.

So no excuses really.

PS: We will not rest Suarez, because this is the only competition we're involve in with no other distractions. We have to give it everything during these last eight game.

[bas5times]

I'm really hoping we get to see Sturridge tried as an inside right forward, with Suarez in his usual false 9 position, with Coutinho on the left.

I said it before we signed him, and still feel that Danny doesn't always have that presence upfront sometimes, and it shouldn't be like its above him to play on the wing, personally i'd much rather Sturridge track back then Suarez in some games.

[EmotionalCitrus]

Gerrard was shite for England. Quite sad to watch him now. I'd leave him out as villa play with a lot of energy. Won't happen mind.

 

[Spanish Al]

Gerrard was shite for England. Quite sad to watch him now. I'd leave him out as villa play with a lot of energy. Won't happen mind.

Are you on glue sir?

Couldnt give a toss how he plays for a team managed by a complete tool. He's played every minute of every league games this season (and played very well too) but you want him dropped because he played shit for england!?

And if you get sad watching him, go on youtube and check out his goal against City. Might cheer you up.

[Floydy]

wont be as easy a game as people are predicting, they play football and at times have looked bafflingly impressive dare I say. They will be looking to get at us similar to Southampton and they have the fluidity in the front 3 to cause us problems. Agbonlahor is always dangerous (cant believe a top 4 team hasn't taken a punt on him).Plus they will feed crosses to Benteke both low and high so we need to be on it defensively.  But of course they will always conceed goals so we have to take advantage of that.
I hope we aren't to jaded/jet lagged to compete all over the pitch with these, they are fighting for their lives at the minute.
Personally I see a 2-2 draw.

[tomrob1989]

wont be as easy a game as people are predicting, they play football and at times have looked bafflingly impressive dare I say. They will be looking to get at us similar to Southampton and they have the fluidity in the front 3 to cause us problems. Agbonlahor is always dangerous (cant believe a top 4 team hasn't taken a punt on him).Plus they will feed crosses to Benteke both low and high so we need to be on it defensively.  But of course they will always conceed goals so we have to take advantage of that.
I hope we aren't to jaded/jet lagged to compete all over the pitch with these, they are fighting for their lives at the minute.
Personally I see a 2-2 draw.

Is this a windup? Agbonlahor? Top four?

[Floydy]

Is this a windup? Agbonlahor? Top four?

seriously, given the opportunity to play with better players, he would improve, He's quick, two footed, scores goals, good in the air, works hard off the ball, loyal and committed. Could do a lot worse than him, given a restricted budget, if they were to go down I would certainly love him to play for us.

[MolbyLovesGravlax]

I think he'll go with the 4231 again hoping to shread Villa before they know what's hit them. Whether we get overun in midfield of not depends on how deep the 3 sit.  It's interesting that this formation gave Rafa the reputation for being too defensive and currently it's too attack minded. At the end of the day, managers just can't win!

It isn't the formation it is the type of player you pick for the middle of the three behind the one. Gerrard of a few seasons back or even Allen or Henderson is very different to Suarez in terms of being able to drop back and put in a shift when needed.

[PhaseOfPlay]

It isn't the formation it is the type of player you pick for the middle of the three behind the one. Gerrard of a few seasons back or even Allen or Henderson is very different to Suarez in terms of being able to drop back and put in a shift when needed.

Yep, this is the major issue. We may set out in a 4-2-3-1, but if Suarez is the central player in the "3", the it becomes a 4-2-4 very quickly. To get the most out of Suarez' mobility, a 4-1-3-2 or 4-3-3 with Lucas shielding, Henderson pressing and Gerrard sorting out the passes is best.

[bigbear]

Yep, this is the major issue. We may set out in a 4-2-3-1, but if Suarez is the central player in the "3", the it becomes a 4-2-4 very quickly. To get the most out of Suarez' mobility, a 4-1-3-2 or 4-3-3 with Lucas shielding, Henderson pressing and Gerrard sorting out the passes is best.

We can play the 3 with Lucas, Gerrard and Henderson with Coutinho/Suarez/Sturridge up front and moving positions. All 3 can swap positions freely across the line and would cause problems for any defence without us giving away the midfield.

I would play that side away from home every game.

[PhaseOfPlay]

We can play the 3 with Lucas, Gerrard and Henderson with Coutinho/Suarez/Sturridge up front and moving positions. All 3 can swap positions freely across the line and would cause problems for any defence without us giving away the midfield.

I would play that side away from home every game.

That would be my preference too, but I think Downing will probably start, for psychological reasons and just to give us a bit of balance. The hope is that Coutinho is the one that sits and not Henderson.

[JG-7]

Henderson has to start. Should have no trouble getting a result against these, with a pretty poor home record. Need to get off to a quick start though, high pressing, quick tempo.

[Kop10]

For me if there's any game where a patient, possession-based, "death by football" system should be used it's Aston Villa away.

Their combination of tactical indiscipline of youth, direct football(meaning high turnover of possession), edginess of home fans and the rashness of the likes of Delph and N'zogbia when frustrated should suit a possession team perfectly.

If we turn it into a tit for tat game though then I fear Benteke will cause us all sorts of problems aerially, with Agbonlahor and Weimann feeding on his scraps. I would bench sturidge for this one and play coutinho and downing wide of Suarez (less tracking back), with three in midfield.

[Matt8Pie]

My team would be Reina, Johnson, Skrtel, Agger, Enrique, Lucas, Gerrard, Henderson, Coutinho, Suarez, Sturridge

They're all fit, right?

[hitman89762000]

My team would be Reina, Johnson, Skrtel, Agger, Enrique, Lucas, Gerrard, Henderson, Coutinho, Suarez, Sturridge

They're all fit, right?

Well not as fit as claire rourke but enough to do the job aye.. I mean the job on the pitch..

[DeLeiva]

So happy the mighty Reds are playing again, the international
Break is painful.

We need to go 4-3-3 and the midfield needs to consist of Lucas,
Gerrard and Henderson.

Other than that there are so many variations that BR could field,
Is amazing that 6 months ago anyone who loosely knew our squad
Could have pretty much to a man picked our starting 11

[Sat1]

My heart says win, and so should my head but it doesnt.

[robgomm]

This seems like the ideal team for most on here....

REINA
JOHNSON--CARRA--AGGER--ENRIQUE
LLUCAS
GERRARD--HENDERSON
COUTINHO--------------SUAREZ
STURRIDGE

Instinctively like this but it's a risk on the full-backs as they may not be as well covered. Generally speaking at least Downing has been pretty good at tracking back on one side.

[the good half]

Great OP..

Personally think Shelvey deserves a start in midfield for this..

Based on what my man?

[El_Pistolero]

Gerrard was shite for England. Quite sad to watch him now. I'd leave him out as villa play with a lot of energy. Won't happen mind.

Sad to watch him? It's a fucking privilege.

[GrkStav]

If we go with a 4231 with Suarez in the middle of the 3 again and one of the 2 flanks in the 3 is not a 1.5 CAM/WF role, then it will not be a wise choice, even if we end up victorious.

The version with Coutinho in the middle of the 3 is slightly better, but it's still not wise.

What PoP describes as a 4-1-3-2 i.e. a 4-1-1-2-2 may work.

Best to use BR's version of KD's "uneven" 4-4-2, but with Hendo on the left flank.

[PhaseOfPlay]

If we go with a 4231 with Suarez in the middle of the 3 again and one of the 2 flanks in the 3 is not a 1.5 CAM/WF role, then it will not be a wise choice, even if we end up victorious.

The version with Coutinho in the middle of the 3 is slightly better, but it's still not wise.

What PoP describes as a 4-1-3-2 i.e. a 4-1-1-2-2 may work.

Best to use BR's version of KD's "uneven" 4-4-2, but with Hendo on the left flank.

These are the same formations to me - Lucas is a dedicated defensive mid, so he is the "1", while Henderson, Gerrard and Downing are staggered across the field in fron of him, and Suarez and Sturridge are the two forwards. For me, 4-1-3-2 is a 4-4-2, with specific midfield responsibilities.

A 4-3-3 would also work, but to get the most out of it, Sturridge would have to be the right wing forward, and Rodgers has seemed reluctant to play him there. The alternative would be Downing or Coutinho on the right and Suarez give a bit more of a disciplined role on the left (the freedom to cut in, but restricted from running into the right side of the field where he would constrict the space for Downing/Coutinho and Johnson).

[MassDriver]

These are the same formations to me - Lucas is a dedicated defensive mid, so he is the "1", while Henderson, Gerrard and Downing are staggered across the field in fron of him, and Suarez and Sturridge are the two forwards. For me, 4-1-3-2 is a 4-4-2, with specific midfield responsibilities.

A 4-3-3 would also work, but to get the most out of it, Sturridge would have to be the right wing forward, and Rodgers has seemed reluctant to play him there. The alternative would be Downing or Coutinho on the right and Suarez give a bit more of a disciplined role on the left (the freedom to cut in, but restricted from running into the right side of the field where he would constrict the space for Downing/Coutinho and Johnson).

How about a 4-3-1-2 mate? I am talking about Lucas , Hendo/Allen and Gerrard as the 3 CMs, Coutinho as the playmaker to link play and Suarez and Sturridge as the two forwards.  It would be a narrow formation but we do utilize our fullbacks to provide width and with three dedicated CMs , our defense will be protected much better than they have been in recent games. Plus one of the forwards can always drift out wide to provide nominal width. Possession will also be retained better with the 3-1 in midfield.

Purely theoretical of course.

[PhaseOfPlay]

How about a 4-3-1-2 mate? I am talking about Lucas , Hendo/Allen and Gerrard as the 3 CMs, Coutinho as the playmaker to link play and Suarez and Sturridge as the two forwards.  It would be a narrow formation but we do utilize our fullbacks to provide width and with three dedicated CMs , our defense will be protected much better than they have been in recent games. Plus one of the forwards can always drift out wide to provide nominal width. Possession will also be retained better with the 3-1 in midfield.

Purely theoretical of course.

I would go with that, and the only concern I would have would be Gerrard moving across the field into space looking for the pass, so it might end up looking more like a 4-2-2-2 at times. Which might not be a bad thing. But yes, we get most our width from our fullbacks, so it's not a massive change in the principles of play. It would be very Ancelotti-like, but then again, he did have his team score 103 goals in 2010

[sinnermichael]

my main concern is keeping them out. i've no doubt we'll create a bucketload of chances. watched villa the other week and QPR who are bottom opened them up at will and should have been 3 or 4 up at half time.

[MassDriver]

I would go with that, and the only concern I would have would be Gerrard moving across the field into space looking for the pass, so it might end up looking more like a 4-2-2-2 at times. Which might not be a bad thing. But yes, we get most our width from our fullbacks, so it's not a massive change in the principles of play. It would be very Ancelotti-like, but then again, he did have his team score 103 goals in 2010

Cheers.

Always liked that formation and its use of a traditional playmaker. You are right about Ancelotti's team doing very well with that formation. I remember him using Kaka as the playmaker in a sort of christmas tree in his Milan heyday and they were brilliant to watch.

But it does need a very good playmaker to operate in that no 10 position to work, doesn't it?  Coutinho should enjoy playing in such a role, he is a natural playmaker.

[MobileBayRed]

It will NEVER happen, but for the run in I would love to see us move to 3-5-2

Wisdom-Carra-Agger at the back.  I really would like to see Wisdom get some time as a CB, but it's a little to risky to play him there in a traditional 4 man defense.  With Carra retiring and it looking for all the world that Skrtel will not be back, we really need to see what we have in Wisdom.  Also, I think the 3-5-2 would help us sort out some of the defensive issues that have plagued us this season, withut sacrificing our goal threat.

In the midfield, you would obviously have Johnson and Enrique on the wings, where they have excelled this year.  In the center I would go with Lucas and Gerrard, with Coutinho sitting in front of them.

Up front, obviously, Suarez and Sturridge.

Again, BR wont do this, but it would be interesting. And truthfully, with the way BR plays, I don't think the 3-5-2 would be seen as overly defensive.

[PhaseOfPlay]

It will NEVER happen, but for the run in I would love to see us move to 3-5-2

Wisdom-Carra-Agger at the back.  I really would like to see Wisdom get some time as a CB, but it's a little to risky to play him there in a traditional 4 man defense.  With Carra retiring and it looking for all the world that Skrtel will not be back, we really need to see what we have in Wisdom.  Also, I think the 3-5-2 would help us sort out some of the defensive issues that have plagued us this season, withut sacrificing our goal threat.

In the midfield, you would obviously have Johnson and Enrique on the wings, where they have excelled this year.  In the center I would go with Lucas and Gerrard, with Coutinho sitting in front of them.

Up front, obviously, Suarez and Sturridge.

Again, BR wont do this, but it would be interesting. And truthfully, with the way BR plays, I don't think the 3-5-2 would be seen as overly defensive.

I think it's seen as overly defensive in England, where it has been played more like a 5-3-2. But it's actually probably the best formation for a possession team, if they have the players to fit the roles (which we do). Real Madrid with Roberto Carlos on the left where brilliant with it, and the Barca dream team used it a lot with Stoichkov playing behind the forwards (coming in from the left, almost the way Suarez plays). I've already advocated for it earlier in the season, but it's a formation you have to commit to long-term. I think we'll play a variation of a 4-3-3/4-4-2 for the rest of the season as it stands.

[Thog]

I read that Rodgers has been impressed with Sterling for England and may look to bring him back into the side after giving him an extended break which he fully needed too. He looked to have regained his sharpness back watching him play the other night. So we've got plenty of options which we haven't always had in recent years. He's got some decisions to make, do we bring in another midfielder to give us that control and if we do, who do we sacrifice as they've all played fairly well. Henderson looks the obvious choice to come in but Rodgers does like Shelvey too. Reina and Carragher are back training according to Marsh and fit to play which is good news.

[Spanish Al]

Normally work weekends but managed to get this saturday off, and managed to get away with a four hour shift on sunday. Despite that I still miss this game as my shift is an 11-3 on sunday ffs! Typical.

Never mind though, I expect us to twat these.

[Dazz7]

the loss back at our place against these lot was one that really annoyed me. they seemed to just be able to do what they wanted at will.
hope we get some revenge and really take the game to them this time. a few goals and a nice clean sheat will do nicely.

[End Product]

I think it's seen as overly defensive in England, where it has been played more like a 5-3-2. But it's actually probably the best formation for a possession team, if they have the players to fit the roles (which we do). Real Madrid with Roberto Carlos on the left where brilliant with it, and the Barca dream team used it a lot with Stoichkov playing behind the forwards (coming in from the left, almost the way Suarez plays). I've already advocated for it earlier in the season, but it's a formation you have to commit to long-term. I think we'll play a variation of a 4-3-3/4-4-2 for the rest of the season as it stands.

I remember the days of Evans and 3-5-2 and enjoyed it, we dominated the ball, and when it clicked teams, could not live with us. It was a popular tactic in the early nineties. Rioch at Arsenal Hoddle at Chelsea and ourselves used it to negate the 4-4-2 norm of the age. I agree as well that Johnson and Jose (even Insua back in the day)  would operate better as wing backs.   

But as a tactic did it not die out? Back in the nineties you had 3 on the bench a goalkeeper a midfielder and a forward so did n't 3-5-2 give you a the option of not having to have a defender on the bench, and if you had an injury in defensive, teams would change shape and still have more game changing attacking options on the sidelines.

Also, did n't the the popularity of 4-2- 3- 1 weaken the strength of 3-5-2 as you have one forward against 3 center backs, leaving one player having little role in the game.

Was not 3-5-2 a solution to 4-4-2 with 3 centre backs up against 2 forwards? And having an extra man in the middle of the park.
Is it not weak against quality wide men? Something highly sought after in the premier league, i remember the Evans team struggled with them .

Also i have no experience of playing it, but, is it not difficult to play unless you have 3 top class defenders ?
Keown said that when they tried it at Arsenal they found it hard to adapt and they had Adams and Bould alongside him at the time, Micah Richards said something similar this year (admittedly this may be more to do with English rigidity and the Arsenal's success of the 4  at the back under Graham).   

Certainly all set ups have weakness, but would the problems i have suggested still exist for the 3 at the back today?   

[PhaseOfPlay]

I remember the days of Evans and 3-5-2 and enjoyed it, we dominated the ball, and when it clicked teams, could not live with us. It was a popular tactic in the early nineties. Rioch at Arsenal Hoddle at Chelsea and ourselves used it to negate the 4-4-2 norm of the age. I agree as well that Johnson and Jose (even Insua back in the day)  would operate better as wing backs.   

But as a tactic did it not die out? Back in the nineties you had 3 on the bench a goalkeeper a midfielder and a forward so did n't 3-5-2 give you a the option of not having to have a defender on the bench, and if you had an injury in defensive, teams would change shape and still have more game changing attacking options on the sidelines.

Also, did n't the the popularity of 4-2- 3- 1 weaken the strength of 3-5-2 as you have one forward against 3 center backs, leaving one player having little role in the game.

No. This is a common fallacy popularized by the likes of Jonathan Wilson and the Zonal Marking website. It only applies if you stand still. 3v1 at the back, statically, is a waste of a player - however, it also affords you the chance to add a defender into midfield on possession, and a midfielder into the attack for the final ball, without sacrificing much security in the back. Additionally, a team that plays with one forward will usually look to break out of defence with a first pass to the target, followed by support, or a pass into the channels for a breaking winger. Three at the back versus 1 forward means that one player can move out to cover the entry pass into the wings, while still maintaining a 2v1 in the back against the forward, allowing you to have depth in the defence at all times. It also allows you to spread the play against 1 or 2 forwards without sacrificing the middle, like the split centreback system, but it can come undone when playing against a genuine front three, unless all three defenders are good in 1v1 situatons

Was not 3-5-2 a solution to 4-4-2 with 3 centre backs up against 2 forwards? And having an extra man in the middle of the park.
Is it not weak against quality wide men? Something highly sought after in the premier league, i remember the Evans team struggled with them .

Yes to the first part, no to the second - it's only a problem if you don't have the horses on the wings to come back on transition. The back three actually allows you to defend one wing and the middle simultaneously - it's the weakside of the ball that is vulnerable, and this is where the problems can occur - not from quality wide men, but from teams who can switch play quickly and effectively. I wouldn't use Evans' back three as a barometer of anything, especially as two of them were Babb and Ruddock. The problem in that team wasn't the 3-5-2, but the overall mentality in the team that Houllier had to set about changing before having any chance of success.

Also i have no experience of playing it, but, is it not difficult to play unless you have 3 top class defenders ?
Keown said that when they tried it at Arsenal they found it hard to adapt and they had Adams and Bould alongside him at the time, Micah Richards said something similar this year (admittedly this may be more to do with English rigidity and the Arsenal's success of the 4  at the back under Graham).   

All systems are as easy or as difficult as they are coached. I played in a back three once, give to us just before a game, having never practiced it, and me having never played central defence before (I was a forward/winger) and we kept our first (and I think only) clean sheet that season. This was at schoolboy level though, but the point is that it's not hard to adjust to at all. As a coach I've used it at youth and adult level to varying degrees of success, and only a few instances of failure (generally with teams that were not good in any system at all). It's not difficult if you adhere to the principles of defending, and in fact it's a quite robus defence. It's no surprise that the "new" attacking Serie A has seen a LOT more coaches use a 2-back system than the zonal back four of the past 20 years. As for Arsenal, they played a back 3 (actually a back 5) quite a lot under Graham, in the early years especially - in fact, that fateful night at Anfield in 1989 was a very good example of how to play a 3 or 5 back system defensively (O'Leary was the sweeper).

Certainly all set ups have weakness, but would the problems i have suggested still exist for the 3 at the back today?

All systems have weaknesses, yes - but generally, if a team is weak in one system, they will be weak in another; it might just not be as obvious. What a back three does is expose a defender to 1v1 situations more than in a back four. This, for me, is one of the problems with the split centrebacks system Rodgers uses and why I advocated for a back three - we are effectively playing a back three shape without a central defender, and we can get exposed in 1v1 battles in certain areas of the field - battles that could be mitigated in a proper 3-back system because we would then have central cover one of the central defenders is defending at the ball, without sacrificing any cover in the back post area.

[coutinho92]

I would go with sturridge on the right with suerez up top and coutinho on the left, Henderson infront of Gerrard and lucas. Sturridge may not help johno down the right as much as downing would but I think hendersons high energy could make up for that and think sturridge could be deadly cutting in on his left or getting in behind.

[Red Genius]

In my mind there is no two ways about this.

They got a result against us at home, hunger should be there to get retribution.

We are a better team than them, as proven by league standing.

There is absolutely no reason why we should not be going there with full confidence in attempting to get 3 points, Rodgers is not Hodgson - we'll turn up there with a gameplan to get 3 points, we can chew over the fat afterwards if there were mistakes, but fundamentally the approach will be to go there and get 3 points, which for me in the fundamentals right.

Got a good feeling about this one.

[Discipline]

Play three in the midfield and we'll win the game.
Play all of Downing, Coutinho, Suarez and Sturridge on the same pitch and they'll be a RAWK meltdown as we'll drop 3 points.

Oh, and I've just seen a formation with Luis out on the wing. Suarez should play as a false 9. Sturridge should be shifted out on the right. It shouldn't be the other way around.

[gazzathered]

My team would be Reina, Johnson, Skrtel, Agger, Enrique, Lucas, Gerrard, Henderson, Coutinho, Suarez, Sturridge

They're all fit, right?

This would be my team although I can see Carra and Downing starting.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Play three in the midfield and we'll win the game.
Play all of Downing, Coutinho, Suarez and Sturridge on the same pitch and they'll be a RAWK meltdown as we'll drop 3 points.

Oh, and I've just seen a formation with Luis out on the wing. Suarez should play as a false 9. Sturridge should be shifted out on the right. It shouldn't be the other way around.

It's not about where he SHOULD be playing, though (I think most of us would agree he's better as the central forward) - it's about where he is and has been playing since we bought Sturridge, which has been as either a shadow striker or an inside wing-forward

[LFCDynamic]

My view:
http://lfcdynamic.blogspot.in/2013/03/two-steps-forward-one-step-back.html