Topic: RAWK Round Table Hull City AFC 3-1 LFC

[PhaseOfPlay]

Some other posters and I have noted that there should be no nailed-on, week-in and week-out, starters in quite a few positions. I know we don't have that many matches this season (no Europe, out of the League Cup), and I know that BR made a big deal of his 'fairness' approach and about the importance of doing one's best in training but it's becoming a bit too obvious (probably much more so for the likes of me who's inclined thus) that our squad players do not maintain a high level of match-readiness by 'training hard'. It's not about chopping and changing, it's about non-youth players getting a game every so often to maintain their match-sharpness and for all the players to be 'on the same page' against real, competitive opposition.

If only any of that were actually true in the real world

[royhendo]

Round Table, season so far -> http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/matchday/league-table.html

Sometimes your side plays shite. It feels bad, but still, we're in amongst it with more upside than the others - that hasn't really changed.

[woof]

One of the major issues which needs to be resolved ASAP is our midfield. In many games this season, only the brilliance of SaS has got us out of trouble and masked our deficiencies. Far too many games when our midfield is dominated by the opposition. So when the main engine room is not right coupled with under performance from Suarez, Moses, Johnson and Sterling, it was clear why we deserved the end result. After the first 15 minutes, I knew we were going to lose the match because we just weren't in the match.

The entire team and Rodgers have to take the blame for such a lame performance.

[BreakfastPercy]

Think Skrtel has gotten off pretty lightly in here to be honest.

Highlights:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x17v5z8_hull-city-3-1-liverpool-all-goals-and-highlights-epl-1-12-13_sport#from=embediframe

1st goal.
What you only really see from the first (live) footage is that Skrtel has a large amount of time to try and close down Hull's goalscorer. He has nobody to mark, which he should be aware of moving out as a defensive unit, and instead backs off. He then turns his back (usually reserved for when he competes for headers) and throws a leg at the shot. He gets enough contact on the shot that if he's any closer when doing so it's not a goal.

2nd goal
Jumps backwards into Touré, the ball cannons off him and stops us from clearing it.

3rd goal
Hasn't got a clue where he is and heads it into his own net

But then this is what happens when you play your worst centreback in a position he's not used to. He's in the RCB position by the time of both their second two goals, and in the way of Touré for the build-up of both those goals.

Fact is, him and Touré were up against a centre forward who averages the same number of shots per game as Glen Johnson (0.9). Hull did not overload us with runners from midfield either so it's not like there was always a second man to pick up. Saying he otherwise had a solid game neglects the fact that Hull are piss poor.

Daniel Agger has 4 clean sheets in 6 starts for us. Jon Flanagan played alongside him in the derby and had the game of his life. Glen Johnson played alongside Skrtel in the derby and had his worst game all season. Call me old-fashioned but a centreback who organizes the defense, and who is cool under pressure, is worth his weight in gold. Agger offers that. I remember several performances from the Danish team (vs Netherlands is one) where Agger has made Kjaer look world class, and Kjaer is definitely not that good.

I can understand that everybody has a bad day, but Rodgers won't make a bigger mistake than picking Skrtel as LCB ahead of Agger and Sakho all season (I hope).

[Prof]

I can't agree more BP.  How Agger isn't starting is a mystery.  Very frustrating.

[Believe]

I can't agree more BP.  How Agger isn't starting is a mystery.  Very frustrating.

I'm thinking BR was trying something in a game where he felt we were strong enough to win - which we should have been. I'm almost certain Skrtel will be off in January or if not the summer and the only logical reason I can come up with for Agger not playing is Skrtel being given a chance to do something before he is moved on.

We should be playing 2 out of Agger, Toure & Sakho every week or all 3 of them in the 3-5-2 (which I was a massive fan of). We shouldn't have dropped points against Hull, but shit happens and as BR says if we get 6 points against Norwich/West Ham we'll have got 10 points from the 5 game sequence starting with Fulham, which is the 2 ppg we're after.

For me, next two matches both Sakho and Agger HAVE to feature.

[slimbo]

This game was played at Hull's pace and we allowed that tempo to dominate how we played (mentally). It was obvious pretty early on that they would casually stroll to take the throw in's, goalkicks etc. and it seemed to reflect in our play. Someone made mention of our Fullbacks playing the ball out. I recall at one point watching us pass along the backline looking for an option and watching Gerrard just standing in a space with a opposition player in the passing lane watching it all happen. It was typical of a lot of our play.

I've a theory that you can see if a player is mentally up for a game within the first 15min. I would've replaced Moses after the first comical attempt to beat the Hull player which led to their goal. Send a message if your going to put your head in that space you sit on the bench and do it from there. Same with Johnson, he's either on or off, and you usually know in the first 20min.

Coutinho is a must at #10. With him there I think you could run with two of Suarez, Sturridge or Aspas and they would do well. He is so creative and we need two up front to give the support we need.

With our current backs we should run with three and not four. Skrtyl on the right, Sakho and Agger as the other two. This would allow Johnson to push further forward relieving him of his dubious defensive capabilities. And I'd play him on the left and use Henderson on the right.

I think this would also give us some depth in positions which is contrary to what Rogers says we don't have. I think he got things totally wrong on the weekend. We would have Toure as cover for the backs, Moses, Kelly for the wings, Alberto for #10, Aspas up front and a midfield #6 & #8 of Gerrard, Allen, Lucas.

Hopefully we'll see some changes against Norwich.

[GrkStav]

If only any of that were actually true in the real world

As I said, it's easy to find 'obvious evidence' when you're looking for it. I am not one to insist in the face of superior knowledge, evidence and logic. 

[Mutton Geoff]

i would only go with Agger and Sakho if fit, Skrtel reminds me a little bit of Henchoz, in that in my opinion he is a reactionary defender, the other two above and Toure probably all read the game better than him, however his reaction speed is good but a lot of what he does is last gasp (panic) defending in my opinion.
However with the Hull game( I have now made myself watch it), i dont think we can single out anyone the whole set up from Root to Branch on the day stank the place out, it was a collective balls up I.e. we lost together and everyone is culpable, but we move on still in a stronger position than most expected at this time of year.

[TSC]

It's a tough question though, because that's a problem we've had for a long while, over at least 3 managers, if not 4 or 5.

Which leads to the tough question people might not like the answer to.

What are the common denominators over 3 managers that have led to performances like this?

Simply think there are too many average players.  Not necessarily bad players, but average at best.  When the two or three key players, especially those who are creative, are either not playing or are off form for a particular game, there are no other players who can step up to any great degree.  And maybe it's a problem Rodgers could have have addressed better than he has done over the few transfer windows he's been here for.  But that's another debate.

[Jookie]

A lot has been written about the team selection and while there were question marks when I saw the team I still fully expected us to turn Hull over.  And we should have done.  There was enough quality on the pitch but too many players (ie all of them) failed to turn up. There can be no excuse for our team thinking that the win will just come with minimal effort and the performance the players put in reminded me of the dark days of our mentally fragile team from 18+ months ago.

In terms of team selection it's easy to look back now and say that Sterling shouldn't have started and the CB pairing was just wrong, but too many players failed to put in the effort required.

Tactically, I'm not sure if we were playing 4-3-3 but it felt like we had regressed to those early matches under Rodgers when the formation simply didn't work because we lack the quality in the centre to dominate.  Add in the slow tempo and we were on a hiding to nothing.

I actually think that Rodgers is suffering from his own mantra of giving players a chance when they put in an impressive performance.  It's noble that he will alter his viewpoint on a player if they impress him but sometimes the manager needs to be ruthless.  Henderson is an example to every player on how to win your place back in a team.  He fully deserves the praise that has come his way, but just because he managed to turn it around doesn't mean that every player that is on his way out can or should.  Skrtel was out the door and he put in one superb performance and he's now undroppable.  No he isn't.  I like Rodgers flexibility, but it can easily look like indecisiveness if it festers, as it has with the CB pairings.  I know Rodgers goes on about squad depth but he still needs to pick a preferred starting two and I'll challenge anyone who things the pairing should be Toure/Skrtel.

Sterling was an odd choice given that he's looked poor whenever he's played this season (which isn't a lot I know).  I agree he needs games, but surely a game in which you've already lost two of your three main attacking threats is not the time?  It just smacks of overconfidence when it came to Hull and backfired badly.  Sterling has gone backwards quickly and he desperately needs a loan in Jan.

As for Johnson, he really is infuriating.  One day I love him, the next he's like Traore.  Zero effort and commitment in the last two games (one of them a derby).  Time to give someone else a go and if Rodgers is worried about his other rightbacks then switch back to 3 CBs and take the responsibility off them.

Can't particularly fault Mignolet as all of the goals were either lucky deflections or defensive brain farts (or both).

Up front we had nothing and Suarez put in one of those moody stomping around performances that we'd begin to forget about.  Moses asked to get back in the team and he failed to take his chance.

And then there's the midfield.  It seems to me that when we play with a high tempo Henderson, Lucas and Gerrard works.  But if we fail to settle into a quick rhythm early then none of these three seem able to take the game by the scruff of its neck and force something.  People can speculate that Rodgers is like many Liverpool managers who is petrified of dropping Gerrard, but sooner or later a decision needs to be taken.  Gerrard is and always will be a legend but he will not help to dominate possession from deep in midfield unless the opposition sets up to allow it.  Lucas was sloppy and Henderson lacking in ideas.  Allen didn't have a bad game against Everton, he had a terrible split second moment.  It happens.  If Coutinho needed replacing he was a natural choice (given that Alberto is still very raw in terms of prem experience),

My optimistic side always tells me that this is just a one off - a bad day at the office etc etc.  But it has opened up a lot of gaping holes in our entire setup.  What is our preferred defensive formation?  How do we dominate the midfield if a team sets up to close us down heavily?  What's our plan B with no Sturridge?  Hell, what is our preferred formation full stop?

I'm just glad we have a game in a couple of days because it means we have a chance to put this behind us, but I can see a seriously nervous game if we don't start well.

Another positive is that with the exception of Arsenal no team is setting the premier league alight and every single one of our rivals (inc Arsenal) have lost to teams that they really shouldn't.  Win the next two and we'll be back on track, but this game has thrown up way too many questions and no real answers.

I think that is pretty much bang on mate.

The only thing I'd say is that Skrtel has had more than 1 good game this season and has arguably been our best centre back. There's not a huge amount of competition for that award so far this season!

In saying that I think Rodgers needs to draw a line under it. Pick whether we want a 4 or 5 at the back, pick what he feels are his best defensive line up and stick with it for 4 or 5 games. Now is the time for some consistency in team selection. The continually chopping and changing at the back isn't helping  and we looked like a bunch of strangers at the back against Hull.

To be fair it's not the only reason why we are conceding lots of goals away from home. The ease at which teams by-pass the midfield and get at our backline is shocking. I think we see this more at away games since the onus is on the home team to press us a bit higher up the pitch. As soon as teams do that we struggle. At home against teams who sit back and defend, I think we get away with our midfields lack of mobility. We play the game in there half of the much more which suits Gerrard's strengths.

One thought I've been having is that if we continue with Gerrard and Lucas in midfield, would playing a higher defensive line help? We'd definitely need to play Sakho at the back for his pace. It wouldn't be ideal for Mignolet given it might expose his weak-ish distribution and I'm not too convinced he'd be great as a 'sweeper keeper'. However, it might make Gerrard's and Lucas' job easier by condensing the play. We seem too stretched in midfield in the last few away games and somehow need to rectify that in terms of changes in tactics or personnel.

[kaz1983]

If we are gonna go back to playing 3 at the back, why not play Henderson as a right back and Johnson on the left?

With Lucas and Allen centrally. Coutinho or Luis Albert in between the lines.

Surely that would give us more attacking intent, I'm with Henderson and Johnson running the flanks that would be a lot more 'forward' thinking that playing 2 fullbacks and expecting them to provide the wide for our attacking players.... or else we are looking at more of a back 5 not 3 central defenders and 2 wing-backs providing attacking support.

[Easy]

We've all seen this with LFC in the past. Damned deflections, own goals, players not turning up en masse and flippin' beach balls. A brain fart of a match for both players and manager.

Without our "get out of jail" card in Sturridge alongside Suarez we were always going to struggle. Physical teams need us to be competitive, pass accurately, make them work. We did none of that. Add in the silly mistakes and you've just lost a match you thought you'd win.

We're still in it, but if we're going to attract the better players in January, I think we really need to be in the top 4 come the window and I'm worried that another couple of poor results could leave us in 7th or 8th if we're not careful - it's that tight. 4 games, 2 losses a win and a draw - that's a run we need to sort out. 

[Garcepticon]

Think Skrtel has gotten off pretty lightly in here to be honest.

Highlights:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x17v5z8_hull-city-3-1-liverpool-all-goals-and-highlights-epl-1-12-13_sport#from=embediframe

1st goal.
What you only really see from the first (live) footage is that Skrtel has a large amount of time to try and close down Hull's goalscorer. He has nobody to mark, which he should be aware of moving out as a defensive unit, and instead backs off. He then turns his back (usually reserved for when he competes for headers) and throws a leg at the shot. He gets enough contact on the shot that if he's any closer when doing so it's not a goal.

2nd goal
Jumps backwards into Touré, the ball cannons off him and stops us from clearing it.

3rd goal
Hasn't got a clue where he is and heads it into his own net

But then this is what happens when you play your worst centreback in a position he's not used to. He's in the RCB position by the time of both their second two goals, and in the way of Touré for the build-up of both those goals.

Fact is, him and Touré were up against a centre forward who averages the same number of shots per game as Glen Johnson (0.9). Hull did not overload us with runners from midfield either so it's not like there was always a second man to pick up. Saying he otherwise had a solid game neglects the fact that Hull are piss poor.

Daniel Agger has 4 clean sheets in 6 starts for us. Jon Flanagan played alongside him in the derby and had the game of his life. Glen Johnson played alongside Skrtel in the derby and had his worst game all season. Call me old-fashioned but a centreback who organizes the defense, and who is cool under pressure, is worth his weight in gold. Agger offers that. I remember several performances from the Danish team (vs Netherlands is one) where Agger has made Kjaer look world class, and Kjaer is definitely not that good.

I can understand that everybody has a bad day, but Rodgers won't make a bigger mistake than picking Skrtel as LCB ahead of Agger and Sakho all season (I hope).

I second all of this, and would add that the opportunity cost of picking Skrtel is huge. I am sure everyone has heard of the term but in case you haven't the definition goes something like "the loss of potential gain from other alternatives when one alternative is chosen".

Everytime we pick Skrtel ahead of Sakho and Agger, we are forgoing a ball playing centre half. Sakho was incredible against Ukraine in the Stade de France, he disguises his passes into midfield and quickly recycles the ball far better into our midfield and forwards. Again, if you pick Skrtel and leave Agger on the bench then you have decided to forgo an infinitely more assured first touch which facilitates much faster movement into midfield.

BreakfastPercy is right to point to the correlation between Agger playing and clean sheets. However, watching on Sunday I thought that the greatest Skrtel associated drag on our performance was the pressure he puts on each of his teammates every time he gets the ball. That is the opportunity cost of the other alternatives, Agger and Sakho have the potential to make those around them better whereas Skrtel seems to slow the pace down to a crawl.

In the West Brom RT I said much the same thing about Henderson as I'd say now, he is a limited player who isn't effective in congested spaces high up the pitch. Unless we have a glut of attacking talent on the pitch already, the No 10 position needs someone who is going to try far more than he did on Sunday.

[LFC77]

I'm sorry to say but the manager has cost us all of the points we have dropped so far this season. I'm not saying we should have a 100% record but we should have more pints than we have. Sometimes I just don't understand how some people become the manager of a club as big as ours when they've been in management for 5 minutes & won absolutely bugger all! I mean not even a League Cup ffs! And before anyone says we've improved since last season - I disagree, we've stayed on the same level as last season where we'll be lucky to finish in 6th above Everton again! I mean what the flying fuck is Sakho doing on the bench 2 games in a row when he is clearly our best defender is just utter retardation imo! I could go on & on but I really haven't got the energy - it's been 23 years since this club's won a league title & I can see us going another 23 years without one at this rate ffs!

[Hazell]

I'm sorry to say but the manager has cost us all of the points we have dropped so far this season. I'm not saying we should have a 100% record but we should have more pints than we have. Sometimes I just don't understand how some people become the manager of a club as big as ours when they've been in management for 5 minutes & won absolutely bugger all! I mean not even a League Cup ffs! And before anyone says we've improved since last season - I disagree, we've stayed on the same level as last season where we'll be lucky to finish in 6th above Everton again! I mean what the flying fuck is Sakho doing on the bench 2 games in a row when he is clearly our best defender is just utter retardation imo! I could go on & on but I really haven't got the energy - it's been 23 years since this club's won a league title & I can see us going another 23 years without one at this rate ffs!

Alright, no need to get so pissed.

[PhaseOfPlay]

I'm sorry to say but the manager has cost us all of the points we have dropped so far this season. I'm not saying we should have a 100% record but we should have more pints than we have. Sometimes I just don't understand how some people become the manager of a club as big as ours when they've been in management for 5 minutes & won absolutely bugger all! I mean not even a League Cup ffs! And before anyone says we've improved since last season - I disagree, we've stayed on the same level as last season where we'll be lucky to finish in 6th above Everton again! I mean what the flying fuck is Sakho doing on the bench 2 games in a row when he is clearly our best defender is just utter retardation imo! I could go on & on but I really haven't got the energy - it's been 23 years since this club's won a league title & I can see us going another 23 years without one at this rate ffs!

So you didn't want Paisley or Fagan or Kenny then?

[robgomm]

Next game is a six pinter

[Sangria]

Next game is a six pinter

Bad news for the alcoholics among us then.

[JackWard33]

Don't want to go over old ground - I was disgusted with the performance and attitude of the players. The team we had should never have been out played by that Hull team yet that was the reality

Instead I want to talk about our defensive problems
Our off the ball and defensively ability finally came home to roost in this game
Yes we were poor all over the pitch - but keep a clean sheet or only conceded one goal and you avert the disaster of a loss

The fact is there are some VERY worrying underlying numbers when you get into our analytics
We're conceeding way too many shots from our opposition - nearly 50% more than last season and enough to put us as a bottom third side by that measure

Here's a scary gem only Fulham and Cardiff have made more saves than we have in the league so far
We've been getting away with it because we've been so good up front and we've been getting lucky in our own box but eventually giving up those kind of opportunities to other teams
If you look at most projections based on our numbers we're looking at finishing 6th - 9th

What's extremely odd about all this is that we have the same group of midfield and defensive players and yet we're doing WAY WAY worse than last season by every defensive measure

The worrying aspect is that this has been true all season - even when we were on a run of wins.
Even the average fan has been able to see we're too easily paid through in midfield and can't deal with any attacking aerial threat and yet neither problem has been fixed

Our midfield set up and back line with the exception of Mignolet (whose been exceptional) need changes.
On this forum we fixate on personnel I actually think there's a decent chance it's partly that but mostly tactical but I'll leave that discussion for another thread
I hope we don't trot out the same team and similar set up against Norwich, win and then convince ourselves all is well because the underlying numbers say it isn't and there are more Hull's around the corner

[PhaseOfPlay]

Don't want to go over old ground - I was disgusted with the performance and attitude of the players. The team we had should never have been out played by that Hull team yet that was the reality

Instead I want to talk about our defensive problems
Our off the ball and defensively ability finally came home to roost in this game
Yes we were poor all over the pitch - but keep a clean sheet or only conceded one goal and you avert the disaster of a loss

The fact is there are some VERY worrying underlying numbers when you get into our analytics
We're conceeding way too many shots from our opposition - nearly 50% more than last season and enough to put us as a bottom third side by that measure

Here's a scary gem only Fulham and Cardiff have made more saves than we have in the league so far
We've been getting away with it because we've been so good up front and we've been getting lucky in our own box but eventually giving up those kind of opportunities to other teams
If you look at most projections based on our numbers we're looking at finishing 6th - 9th

What's extremely odd about all this is that we have the same group of midfield and defensive players and yet we're doing WAY WAY worse than last season by every defensive measure

The worrying aspect is that this has been true all season - even when we were on a run of wins.
Even the average fan has been able to see we're too easily paid through in midfield and can't deal with any attacking aerial threat and yet neither problem has been fixed

Our midfield set up and back line with the exception of Mignolet (whose been exceptional) need changes.
On this forum we fixate on personnel I actually think there's a decent chance it's partly that but mostly tactical but I'll leave that discussion for another thread
I hope we don't trot out the same team and similar set up against Norwich, win and then convince ourselves all is well because the underlying numbers say it isn't and there are more Hull's around the corner

Look into the numbers though.

We've conceded 182 shots
52% have been from outside the box
So around 95 shots from outside the box.

We've conceded only 3 goals from distance.

So 97% of shots from outside the box are either wide or saved. That probably beefs up the numbers of saved shots, which makes it look worse statistically than it is in football terms.

We've conceded 16 goals, of which I think around 50% were from set-piece situations. Meaning over 13 games, we have to account for 8 goals from open play. 8 goals from open play is not really "bad defending". They were conceded from defensive mistakes, for sure, but in terms of numbers, when you look deeper, and look at the actual FOOTBALL behind the numbers, you will see that our shots conceded are largely manageable, so the actual volume is not a concern. What is a concern is our lack of organisation and concentration on set-pieces. Fix that, and we will have one of the best defensive records in the league. 

[JackWard33]

Look into the numbers though.

We've conceded 182 shots
52% have been from outside the box
So around 95 shots from outside the box.

We've conceded only 3 goals from distance.

So 97% of shots from outside the box are either wide or saved. That probably beefs up the numbers of saved shots, which makes it look worse statistically than it is in football terms.

We've conceded 16 goals, of which I think around 50% were from set-piece situations. Meaning over 13 games, we have to account for 8 goals from open play. 8 goals from open play is not really "bad defending". They were conceded from defensive mistakes, for sure, but in terms of numbers, when you look deeper, and look at the actual FOOTBALL behind the numbers, you will see that our shots conceded are largely manageable, so the actual volume is not a concern. What is a concern is our lack of organisation and concentration on set-pieces. Fix that, and we will have one of the best defensive records in the league. 

You are sort of on to something with this which is that the location of the shots we give away is actually decent - a lot of the time we are restricting opponents to longer range efforts
This may also indicate our back line is actually performing okay in preventing our opponents having efforts inside the box

HOWEVER - there is a bigger overall problem which you can't see unless you get into our 'shot dominance numbers'
The best indicator analytics currently has for team performance is the amount of shots you take vs your opponents - now there are different measures for this (you can net out blocked shots etc) but on all the measures we're performing like a mid table side
We've been saved this season by Mignolet literally saving us, luck at the back (we haven't conceeded as many as we'd expect to given the amount and location of shots) and having an exceptional forward line which is shooting from good locations for fun

None of this though gets over our central problem which is we're conceeding too many shots and attacking opportunities to be successful in the long run and we won't be a top 4 team unless we fix it

[GrkStav]

Didn't BoH/Pop address the issue of the number of shots taken by the opposition argument?

If the actual number of shots attempted by the opposition from those areas which have the highest likelihood of resulting in goals scored (immediately or off a keeper save) is high (relative to some sort of relevant average), then we truly have a problem, regardless of what percentage of all shot attempted by the opposition they represent.

[JackWard33]

Didn't BoH/Pop address the issue of the number of shots taken by the opposition argument?

If the actual number of shots attempted by the opposition from those areas which have the highest likelihood of resulting in goals scored (immediately or off a keeper save) is high (relative to some sort of relevant average), then we truly have a problem, regardless of what percentage of all shot attempted by the opposition they represent.

Without going into more detail there are various ways of measuring it and unfortunately we do poorly in most of them.
The only thing we do well at defensively is the ratio of shots taken from bad to good areas... but as the overall number we're conceding is high this is only of limited comfort

To be honest you don't even need all the analytics you just need to have watched our games to know we're conceding way too many goal scoring / shot taking opportunities - it's just interesting the underlying numbers have been showing this all season even when we were top

[robgomm]

My eyes match Jack's statisitcal hints there, certainly lately. We seem to have been so open at the back. I readily agree we restrict shots to from outside the box but even if you just see the shots conceded per game stat on whoscored you can see we are 7 and far nearer to bottom clubs in the detail than top. We are not really restricting chances well enough. I can't say I agree the numbers are not a concern.

[cowtownred]

I don't often comment on the football anymore.

But to me we have a seriously weak central midfield (sometimes I wonder if we have a central midfield at all?).  Gerrard is the stand out performer, but he is deeper now and less able to utilise his past strengths of getting in the box. Lucas has went backwards, he cannot cover the ground any more as he did before the injury, and Henderson hasn't pushed on as i admit I thought he would.  We are over-run nearly every game.

And I must say I think far too much hyperbole given to a number of pretty average players too.  This includes the perennial favourites on here of Agger, Johnson and Enrique (well he appears to be found out more recently).

In saying that, I believe Rogers is growing in to the job, and given time is likely to get more things right.  So seeds are being sown I think.  But yet again, as has been the case every year for the past 20 there comes a time when you look up and say '' We have a long long way to go before we can think of ourselves as back up there''

[GrkStav]

Without going into more detail there are various ways of measuring it and unfortunately we do poorly in most of them.
The only thing we do well at defensively is the ratio of shots taken from bad to good areas... but as the overall number we're conceding is high this is only of limited comfort

To be honest you don't even need all the analytics you just need to have watched our games to know we're conceding way too many goal scoring / shot taking opportunities - it's just interesting the underlying numbers have been showing this all season even when we were top

The overall number of shots taken from good areas: is that 'high' by the relevant statistical standard?

As you say 10% vs 90% bad areas is better than 30-70% but only if that 10% represents a smaller absolute number of shots than the 30%.

[JackWard33]

The overall number of shots taken from good areas: is that 'high' by the relevant statistical standard?

As you say 10% vs 90% bad areas is better than 30-70% but only if that 10% represents a smaller absolute number of shots than the 30%.

Yes we're conceding too many shots from everywhere! Although it could be worse if we were conceding more of those shots in bad areas
There's a few different measures of it but this guy explains it pretty clearly in this article

http://www.statsbomb.com/2013/12/football-thoughts-and-figures-after-dec-1st/

[PhaseOfPlay]

You are sort of on to something with this which is that the location of the shots we give away is actually decent - a lot of the time we are restricting opponents to longer range efforts
This may also indicate our back line is actually performing okay in preventing our opponents having efforts inside the box

HOWEVER - there is a bigger overall problem which you can't see unless you get into our 'shot dominance numbers'
The best indicator analytics currently has for team performance is the amount of shots you take vs your opponents - now there are different measures for this (you can net out blocked shots etc) but on all the measures we're performing like a mid table side
We've been saved this season by Mignolet literally saving us, luck at the back (we haven't conceeded as many as we'd expect to given the amount and location of shots) and having an exceptional forward line which is shooting from good locations for fun

None of this though gets over our central problem which is we're conceeding too many shots and attacking opportunities to be successful in the long run and we won't be a top 4 team unless we fix it

Here is the one figure you have to look at. Forget TSR, which is what I think you're referring to (although it's a good metric, I think even Grayson has some misgivings about it?).

The conversion rate for shots to goals is 10%. It has been for decades.

The conversion rate for shots on target, is 33%. It has been for decades.

We've conceded 16 goals, through 182 shots. We're doing slightly better than the conversion rate in total shots. We could do better though. Our shots on target conceded total is somewhat influenced by the incredible 12 shots on target that Everton had. Defensively, the last two games have been awful. But the actual defensive unit is only a part of the problems. Our defensive woes are centred on two areas - set plays, and central midfield. Unless Rodgers fixes those, he will find himself in trouble later on. 

We're definitely not doing a GOOD job defensively, but I feel the last two game skew the numbers somewhat (and isn't the cry in these analyses always "too small a sample size"?), much like the "shots for" and "possession" stats were skewed earlier on by the first 4 games. By game 20, we'll know more about which way we are going. Right now, we are probably in a "synthesis" phase of our season, where the defensiveness of the first part, and the attacking-ness of the second part, are meeting with some friction. When that settles, we'll probably be a better team, and our numbers will settle down to something more positive.

[steveeastend]

The thing is though that, no matter how you wanna twist it, we HAVE TO win these sort of games for making it top 4. These points will cost us, there is no doubt about that and it was because of a lethargic effort of the majority of our players first and foremost.

Rodgers is to blame with experimenting too much. I donīt wanna see Flanagan anywhere near the first team as long as we are not 10 points clear at the top. We bought experienced players like Cissokho or Sakho doing a proper job, whatīs the point in buying them in the first place  when we donīt play them in situations when they are needed..

The upcoming fixture list until january is extremely worrying considering the injury of Sturridge and how important he is for our play. With wins in those winnable games like Newcastle away and Hull we would be in a much better position when going in those difficult games against Tottenham, City and Chelsea. Now though, it looks as we have to win at least one and draw the other two. Not easy at all but the players obviously havenīt learn from last sesaons.

[JackWard33]

Here is the one figure you have to look at. Forget TSR, which is what I think you're referring to (although it's a good metric, I think even Grayson has some misgivings about it?).

The conversion rate for shots to goals is 10%. It has been for decades.

The conversion rate for shots on target, is 33%. It has been for decades.

We've conceded 16 goals, through 182 shots. We're doing slightly better than the conversion rate in total shots. We could do better though. Our shots on target conceded total is somewhat influenced by the incredible 12 shots on target that Everton had. Defensively, the last two games have been awful. But the actual defensive unit is only a part of the problems. Our defensive woes are centred on two areas - set plays, and central midfield. Unless Rodgers fixes those, he will find himself in trouble later on. 

We're definitely not doing a GOOD job defensively, but I feel the last two game skew the numbers somewhat (and isn't the cry in these analyses always "too small a sample size"?), much like the "shots for" and "possession" stats were skewed earlier on by the first 4 games. By game 20, we'll know more about which way we are going. Right now, we are probably in a "synthesis" phase of our season, where the defensiveness of the first part, and the attacking-ness of the second part, are meeting with some friction. When that settles, we'll probably be a better team, and our numbers will settle down to something more positive.

Yeah our TSR is bad.... but then so are other measures Sotr, fenwick and PDO. Well not bad but mid table as opposed to where we want to be

The last 2 games have been bad however I've been following the numbers all season and it's been pretty consistent unfortunately - even when we've been winning. Basically our attack compensates for a lot.

However you do make some really good points and I don't want to over do the drama - we have things to improve rather than being in crisis
I'm not as worried about the central defence as midfield as I think in defence we have the personnel to improve but need better organisation
Both the numbers (the many shots conceded in total but doing slightly better in not conceding them from inside the box) and the eye test point to us having a huge problem off the ball in central mid and I'm not sure how we fix that with the current personnel

The "SAS" (bluergh) part of the season is over for the time being and we probably did make some defensive sacrifices to make that work - however we reorganise now we need to be better off the ball now as the attack won't be able to compensate in the same way

[John C]

I donīt wanna see Flanagan anywhere near the first team as long as we are not 10 points clear at the top. We bought experienced players like Cissokho or Sakho doing a proper job,

But Flanagan has shown a higher level of composure and competence than Cissokho imo mate. I'm flabbergasted by Sakho isn't starting though, its astonishing.

[steveeastend]

But Flanagan has shown a higher level of composure and competence than Cissokho imo mate.

IMO, thatīs totally wrong mate, itīs similiar to the hype in regards of Toure IMO. Flanagan isnīt anywhere ready to be a regular, Cissokho is still a level above him in terms of everything you can think of. I think Flanagan was given game time by Rodgers because he wanted to reward his effort in training, similar with Toure but thatīs not working on a PL level.

[PhaseOfPlay]

But Flanagan has shown a higher level of composure and competence than Cissokho imo mate. I'm flabbergasted by Sakho isn't starting though, its astonishing.

Team hasn't been hasn't been announced yet, John. I think people are putting too much store into a theory that we haven't even seen pictures of yet.

[steveeastend]

Team hasn't been hasn't been announced yet, John. I think people are putting too much store into a theory that we haven't even seen pictures of yet.

Donīt get me wrong, I think Flanagan will probably start. I think itīs a mistake though, he isnīt ready for this on a regular basis yet. He can have an "heroic" performance in big games but when there is a proactive approach needed, and I donīt necessarly mean making runs or showing a certain attitude, he doesnīt have the quality. We have enough players from this level at the moment to deal with, Cissokhos passing for sure is a level above Flanno..

[GrkStav]

By the way, especially those of you who have access to the more sophisticated match-analysis software etc:

I am under the impression that we actually did attempt, on numerous occasions vs Hull City to press high. We just weren't that successful.

Is there a way to establish empirically, but in summary form, whether we did in fact attempt to press high on a regular basis?

[-Daws-]

By the way, especially those of you who have access to the more sophisticated match-analysis software etc:

I am under the impression that we actually did attempt, on numerous occasions vs Hull City to press high. We just weren't that successful.

Is there a way to establish empirically, but in summary form, whether we did in fact attempt to press high on a regular basis?

Judging purely on the eye and memory, Henderson and Sterling were, Moses and Suarez not so much.

[PhaseOfPlay]

By the way, especially those of you who have access to the more sophisticated match-analysis software etc:

I am under the impression that we actually did attempt, on numerous occasions vs Hull City to press high. We just weren't that successful.

Is there a way to establish empirically, but in summary form, whether we did in fact attempt to press high on a regular basis?

We only had 11 defensive actions in Hull's half

[GrkStav]

We only had 11 defensive actions in Hull's half

Forgive my ignorance, but what is included under "defensive actions"?

Also, the absolute number of actions itself can be misleading, no? If the other team has 0, 1, or max 2 passes in their half before 'launching it' then the opportunities for high pressing are reduced.

Anyway, I may be grasping at straws.

[GrkStav]

Judging purely on the eye and memory, Henderson and Sterling were, Moses and Suarez not so much.

Off memory, Suarez much more so than Moses.