Topic: Round Table: Liverpool 0 Aston Villa 1

[GrkStav]

I think all contributors to the Round Table should take on, voluntarily, an obligation to watch the match twice.

I've only watched it once, delayed (on tape) knowing the score, and I find some of the descriptions and evaluations of players' performances extremely difficult to find even plausible, let alone convincing.

One example from quite a few would be Markovic. How anyone could find anything negative to say about his performance is beyond my comprehension.

My own critique basically has to do with the bizarre use of what appeared to be a flat 2 2-1 central midfield setup, and the persistence of using SG as the most withdrawn, "controller" CM in the 2nd half (when our midfield was clearly more 1-2 than 2-1), at which time AVFC were in a very low-block defensive stance. With Lovren and Sakho at or beyond the half-way line, what exactly the point is of Gerrard effectively stepping on especially Lovren's toes to get the ball to pass it ahead escapes me.

[Warks Moustache]

It felt like the team set up was off from the start. Having Hendo square with Gerrard in a 4-2-3-1 was awful and we really missed Henderson's energy further up the pitch.

This has been an issue endemic with us playing in a 4-2-3-1, Coutinho looks lost as a number 10 (its clearly not his best position and it does him no favours) and we lack dynamism going forward (having Henderson babysit Gerrard). I understand that Brendan was trying to protect Gerrard from being swarmed like when Villa came to Anfield last year, but I thought Gerrard had grown into that deep playmaking role and could have acquitted himself well if he was asked to play that position alone.

It's frustrating to think back to the Newcastle away game during Brendan's first season in charge and our tactical flexibility to play with a 4-3-3 and have the likes of Coutinho put in domineering performances. If we can't play a 4-4-2 diamond, I would like to see a 4-3-3 where we play Coutinho in his best position (a centre midfielder) and keep Hendo further up the pitch.

[Mr Dilkington]

Or some people just have different opinions.

I've only watched it once (live) and I found Markovic to be quite poor. Maybe if I watch it again he'll become Zvonimir Boban.

[L666KOP]

But we did not ask enough questions or put them under enough sustained pressure. It was a flat performance. I wrote before that this way of playing that they use can work well against bigger teams but it is when they face the teams around them that they can sometimes struggle - because they are expected to do more with the ball. Anyway, we need to learn from this game because there will be other games like this where teams come to Anfield and sit deep and look to be negative. We need to find different ways of unlocking them and look at how we can possibly draw them out of their shape.

Just how much us being poor, or Villa doing a number on us contributed overall, I don't know. But they are good at what they do because it's how they play. Like Chelsea lite if you will.

Chelsea's poor results last season came against teams that sit back and invite the 'come on'.
Against sides that have a go Chelsea are a beast at lying in wait, then striking a fatal blow.

9 out of 10 sides that come to Anfield and try the same will get beat, the outpouring of angst surprises me to be honest. You don't get to be that good at a particular system unless it's ingrained over time. Like many have said, it's easy to park the bus.

What isn't so easy is to keep a steely focus for 90 minutes, and be able to chase shadows until you've nothing left in the tank. You don't need talented, technical players to do it well, just committed, hard working players.

[L666KOP]

Or some people just have different opinions.

I've only watched it once (live) and I found Markovic to be quite poor. Maybe if I watch it again he'll become Zvonimir Boban.

I thought Markovic and Lallana both let the game slip by.

I wanted to see Markovic drive at the defence like he showed flashes of at the Ethiad, we saw yesterday how teams can be unsettled by it.

Mario desperately needed a partner, and in hindsight Lambert would have been a perfect partner given the bullying Senderos gave him.

[MobileBayRed]

I guess the general wisdom takeaway from the game is that Rodger's doesn't know how to beat the parked bus.  Maybe there is something in that, yesterday we certainly looked shallow on ideas.  I think this game, albeit disappointing, will go a long way to getting this squad where we need to be by the end of the season.

Lallana early on looked like a player who had missed all of pre-season and hadn't played a competitive game in over two months (you know, cause its true).  By the end of the game he was looking more and more like the player that Rodgers made his priority summer acquisition.  There will still be questions about whether Lallana and Coutinho can coexist together on the pitch.  In the first half they did not much get along.  Both players trying to do the same thing and occupying the same position.  It wasn't clear which of the two was supposed to be playing centrally and which was supposed to be playing out wide.

As others have rightly pointed out, the formation and tactics in the first half neutered Henderson a great deal.  Without Hendo making his runs from midfield, we really only had one goal scorer, Balotelli.  Too many creaters, not enough finishers.  Thought that Rodgers should have put Lambert on for Markovic around the 30 minute mark.  (Not because Markovic was poor, just that he wasn't ever likely to offer anything from that wide right position).  We really needed to go 2 up top early on and revert to a diamond.  I think we play much better when our width comes from the fullbacks and not the wide forwards.  Plus, Balotelli wanders a lot, especially when he isn't getting much service.  Needed Lambert in and around the box.  Was very surprised that we never saw Lambert and Balotelli together.

Until the last 30 minutes or so, I was still wondering where the Coutinho from pre-season went.  Then he decided he was the best player on the pitch and the most likely to score.  He really went to another level at that point.  Unfortunately it was too late.

I think the loss of Allen hurt as much (maybe more) than Sturridge.  With no Allen or Can, we don't have that many midfield options.  It will be interesting to see if Rodgers trusts Lucas enough to get some time until Allen comes back. 

Ultimately, we are going to need Lallana and Markovic as the season grows.  Markovic is suspended for the first two CL games, which looking back, made it almost obvious he would get the start over Sterling.  Lallana needs the game time to get back to speed.  Markovic needs the game time to figure out how best to use him. 

I think we respond with a strong performance Tuesday night.

[Number 7]

First of all Villa were not the better side on Saturday. My eyes are tired of reading that. We basically did what we used to do a lot, but not so much in the last year and a half, which is essentially beat ourselves. It was self inflicted. Granted Villa defended very well, but they were dominated by us for basically the entire game. We had 75% possession, and sure we didn't do much with it but this theory that Villa were the better team is hugely flawed. They played a solid road game and kept it tight, but they were helped by some poor refereeing decisions (expected when I saw who the ref was), an absolute hash of a corner clearance by us, and our old achilles heel of shooting ourselves in the foot. Their goal wasn't as a result of a great move or anything, it was because of terrible schoolboy level defending by us that simply has to stop. In a lot of ways the game reminded me of the Southampton home defeat last season, where similarly their goal came from a corner and we just couldn't get anything going at all. Had we been a bit more clinical or even created a few more chances there is no way Villa come away with 3 points there. Villa will likely revert to their customary mediocrity in the next 4 matches, and if they really are a good team they will get something out of those matches, but I don't believe they'll get anything at all.

I think Rodgers biggest problem this season is going to be finding the balance in the team between the high frequency of matches. Last season he could prepare all week for our next opponent with basically 1 match a week. He could also afford to use his best players in every match. This season he doesn't have that luxury, and on Saturday he obviously had one eye on the CL on Tuesday. I actually don't blame him for not starting Sterling. If he's played 2 internationals and there is another game on Tuesday, he's within his right not to use him on the weekend. It's just not possible for him to play every game. The issue going forward will be that the players that step in have to be at the same calibre as the ones stepping out. Now on Saturday, you could put it down too many new players trying to bed in to the system, and it isn't going to all come together in one game. You could tell after about 10 minutes in that it wasn't clicking.

The other thing is that people say International breaks affect every top team. That is true, but when you're away with your National team for 1 week you lose all rhythm, momentum and fluency you would have had training all week with your club. Especially if you're being resorted to using shite tactics, as is the case with Hodgson. The truth of the matter is that they do have a bearing on the next immediate PL match, and are a massive fucking menace. We lost Sturridge, Can and Allen in that one week. Now, all of sudden we're down 3 players plus 1 who is suspended, for Ludogorets. It really doesn't help does it!

I thought we desperately missed Sturridge. He is a hugely important player for not only this team but this system which relies on quick and dynamic play. Balotelli cannot do what Sturridge does. He can potentially play well with him, but he isn't going to play on the shoulder of the last man, or start the attack with pace like Sturridge can. As the lone striker he isn't as effective in our traditional style of play as Sturridge is. Now that doesn't necessarily render him a useless striker, just a different type of striker. As for other performances, I thought Manquillo and Moreno were our best players on the day. Both continue to impress me and have settled in much quicker than Markovic or Balotelli.

You could put Saturday down to a blip, but it's only a blip if the players that are being rotated are going to play at the same intensity and we win those matches going forward. If Sterling, Allen, Sturridge or whoever can't play every game for various reasons and their replacements can't perfom at the same level it is going to become a problem. Obviously, it is unfair to make that judgement after one game. Onwards and upwards.

[Penfold78]

I think all contributors to the Round Table should take on, voluntarily, an obligation to watch the match twice.

I've only watched it once, delayed (on tape) knowing the score, and I find some of the descriptions and evaluations of players' performances extremely difficult to find even plausible, let alone convincing.

One example from quite a few would be Markovic. How anyone could find anything negative to say about his performance is beyond my comprehension.

My own critique basically has to do with the bizarre use of what appeared to be a flat 2 2-1 central midfield setup, and the persistence of using SG as the most withdrawn, "controller" CM in the 2nd half (when our midfield was clearly more 1-2 than 2-1), at which time AVFC were in a very low-block defensive stance. With Lovren and Sakho at or beyond the half-way line, what exactly the point is of Gerrard effectively stepping on especially Lovren's toes to get the ball to pass it ahead escapes me.

Sometimes a coach will see their team go native and completely forget tactics and training sessions. As the situation becomes more desperate the leadership on the field will count more than the leadership on the sidelines. If you only have one natural outfield leader ( or if one of the leaders believes that they alone can save the day) then they will put themselves in the position where they can influence play. When the team also deploys target men we see the great British punt off. This has been most notable in turgid England games as Beckham, Gerrard and now Rooney think that the best zone of influence in a crisis is the one metre strip just in front of the centre back pair. Queue the long quarter back pass on to a team mates head and BOOM goal. Or not. The ball comes back and they try again. Obviously even less effective than this and even more of a sporting turdfest is the short pass from the 'gonna save the day' zone to another midfielder, effectively overloading your own defence when you are in fact attempting to score a goal. Given our recent signings we'll see more of this as the season progresses, mark my words. 

[Corkboy]

I think all contributors to the Round Table should take on, voluntarily, an obligation to watch the match twice.

I've only watched it once, delayed (on tape) knowing the score, and I find some of the descriptions and evaluations of players' performances extremely difficult to find even plausible, let alone convincing.

One example from quite a few would be Markovic. How anyone could find anything negative to say about his performance is beyond my comprehension.

OP

Upsides? Markovic looked good.

Boy has a lovely touch.

[007.lankyguy]

I thought Markovic and Lallana both let the game slip by.

I wanted to see Markovic drive at the defence like he showed flashes of at the Ethiad, we saw yesterday how teams can be unsettled by it.

Mario desperately needed a partner, and in hindsight Lambert would have been a perfect partner given the bullying Senderos gave him.

I wrote on Twitter at half time that I thought we needed two main changes. The first one was Sterling. The ability to run at opponents, to beat them, to draw players towards you is useful against any opposition, whatever approach you or they are taking. That was a clear change that was needed.

The second one I thought was to bring Balotelli into the game. I was with you - I thought at some point we needed to see either Borini or Lambert (preferably Lambert against an opponent that was sitting deep) in order to allow Balotelli to drop off, receive and link with others in attack. You saw it at points in the first half - Balotelli dropping off to receive and then a midfield runner sprinting in behind. In this type of game, against an opponent that is sat low in a 4-5-1, trying to make it difficult to penetrate, you have to free up your most talented players and despite what some have said about Balotelli, if you free him up and get him as involved as you can in attack, he's a match-changing type of player. Him and Sterling linking up was in my opinion our best option when it was clear our midfield was not functioning well at all.

The biggest disappointment for me was we fell into the trap of crossing the ball into the box and not even from good positions near the byline but from too deep. That was always going to suit them and unless we won the second ball and caught them disorganised as they pushed back up, that wasn't going to be profitable.

[The Playmaker]

Just how much us being poor, or Villa doing a number on us contributed overall, I don't know. But they are good at what they do because it's how they play. Like Chelsea lite if you will.

Chelsea's poor results last season came against teams that sit back and invite the 'come on'.
Against sides that have a go Chelsea are a beast at lying in wait, then striking a fatal blow.

9 out of 10 sides that come to Anfield and try the same will get beat, the outpouring of angst surprises me to be honest. You don't get to be that good at a particular system unless it's ingrained over time. Like many have said, it's easy to park the bus.

What isn't so easy is to keep a steely focus for 90 minutes, and be able to chase shadows until you've nothing left in the tank. You don't need talented, technical players to do it well, just committed, hard working players.

I completely agree with what you wrote. This has been ingrained into those players over time. They've managed to get some good results against big teams (like ourselves, Chelsea, Arsenal and Manchester City) but have come unstuck against the teams in and around them when they've been expected to do more with the ball. I think one of the disappointments was our inability to really draw them out. We lacked drive from midfield and we never really managed to draw them out from their shape. They looked comfortable.

They let us have a lot of the ball and we didn't do enough with it in this game. It was very congested in the final third. It is easy in some aspects to park the bus but there is a huge amount of discipline involved - and obviously an element of luck in hoping that the opposition can't break you down and score. As soon you concede, you need to obviously look to score or face losing the match! This can open up the match and leave space for the opposition to exploit.

[Prof]

Last season, we had an attacking trio of Suarez, Sturridge and Sterling.

One has left, one was injured and one was (rightly) rested.  Starting with a brand new front three was always going to be difficult.

In the system is the king thread, I wrote extensively about the challenge behind developing cohesion.  We've signed exactly the right types of player, but ideally they would have had a lot more time to develop their understanding before playing without the core from last season.  The starting line-up was thrust upon Rodgers due to the injuries from the international break to Sturridge and Allen, and by the fact Hodgson got his hands on Sterling.  It also hasn't helped that the injury to Lallana (our new signing most likely to adapt quickly) has limited his invovement up to now.

The good news is that the starting XI has now had time together in competition earlier than planned, so that might speed up their development.  The more they get game time together the better.

Overall, I can understand the issues with the state of play, so I'm not overly concerned.  The approach we are building has an incredibly high ceiling, but takes longer to implement than a destructive system.

[GrkStav]

What do the phrases "we lacked drive from midfield" and "we lacked that bit of quality in the final third" really mean, operationally so to speak?

I interpret the latter to mean that we didn't attempt or we were not successful in executing 1v1 and/or 1-2s against a tight, well-organized, low-block defense.

I cannot figure out what the former really entails when playing against a low-block defense that cedes possession and man-marks Gerrard.

[GrkStav]

Or some people just have different opinions.

I've only watched it once (live) and I found Markovic to be quite poor. Maybe if I watch it again he'll become Zvonimir Boban.

I need to watch the game again, mate, as well. I didn't mean to suggest that MY assessment was the correct one.

[Prof]

What do the phrases "we lacked drive from midfield" and "we lacked that bit of quality in the final third" really mean, operationally so to speak?

I interpret the latter to mean that we didn't attempt or we were not successful in executing 1v1 and/or 1-2s against a tight, well-organized, low-block defense.

I cannot figure out what the former really entails when playing against a low-block defense that cedes possession and man-marks Gerrard.

Drive in midfield, to me, means breaking lines to cause defenders to react to cover.

Quality in the final third is the precision in execution of a pass, dribble shot etc.

Moreno had a great chance to square to an unmarked Markovic but 'lacked that bit of quality".  I.e. was slightly ponderous and then imprecise in his delivery.

[GrkStav]

Drive in midfield, to me, means breaking lines to cause defenders to react to cover.

Quality in the final third is the precision in execution of a pass, dribble shot etc.

Moreno had a great chance to square to an unmarked Markovic but 'lacked that bit of quality".  I.e. was slightly ponderous and then imprecise in his delivery.

Very helpful, thanks.

Is the 'breaking of lines' with the ball or without it?

[L666KOP]

I completely agree with what you wrote. This has been ingrained into those players over time. They've managed to get some good results against big teams (like ourselves, Chelsea, Arsenal and Manchester City) but have come unstuck against the teams in and around them when they've been expected to do more with the ball. I think one of the disappointments was our inability to really draw them out. We lacked drive from midfield and we never really managed to draw them out from their shape. They looked comfortable.

If we'd have swapped Lambert for either Lallana/Markovic we could have dropped Mario back into the 3 as it were, and put Rickie up in amongst the elbows and kicks that Senderos was dishing out, I feel he's more adept at not only dealing with them, but giving some back, but in a 'controlled' manner. Rickie could have responded to the 'Welcome to the premiership' digs with a 'Welcome to Anfield' dig back, you just feel Mario's response would have been 'Fuck you, pick your arse off the Kop roof', and looked on forlornly as the ref waved a red.
Mario dropping out slightly would have had him in and around Coutinho, and either Lazar/Adam. Possibly with more room to operate.

The biggest faux pas for me though, was Brendan using Jordan to 'protect' Stevie. Allen/Can being injured obviously didn't help. Especially given that Lucas appears to have been phased out barring real emergencies.

We missed Jordans running, and linking the midfield to our number 10, and as a result Coutinho had to keep dropping back into our own half to collect the ball. In turn this meant a chasm opened up between our '10' and our front 3. This was easy pickings for their back 4, and the Delph/Cleverly pairing.

[Prof]

Very helpful, thanks.

Is the 'breaking of lines' with the ball or without it?

I'd say with, but it could be related to pressing I suppose, but less about forward runs.

[GrkStav]

I'd say with, but it could be related to pressing I suppose, but less about forward runs.

So, something like what the old "force of nature" Gerrard would do, right? Almost from a standing start, quick first-step with the ball, leaving the player marking you immobilized and creating a cascade of adjustments which open up possibilities for your team-mates?

Something like that?

[Prof]

So, something like what the old "force of nature" Gerrard would do, right? Almost from a standing start, quick first-step with the ball, leaving the player marking you immobilized and creating a cascade of adjustments which open up possibilities for your team-mates?

Something like that?

Yes

[L666KOP]

Yes

I'd sort of hoped that Lallana and Markovic would have been the ones to do that.

I know I keep on about it, but we saw yesterday with DiMaria what problems running with the ball creates, if you run directly with the ball (obviously running angles without it) it creates havoc. We just didn't have that yesterday. You only need to beat the first man, and immediately it gives the CB a decision to make, stay and keep shape, or come out and attack the ball, knowing there'll be someone drifting into the voids he leaves.

[Bergersrightwingviews]

I'd sort of hoped that Lallana and Markovic would have been the ones to do that.

I know I keep on about it, but we saw yesterday with DiMaria what problems running with the ball creates, if you run directly with the ball (obviously running angles without it) it creates havoc. We just didn't have that yesterday. You only need to beat the first man, and immediately it gives the CB a decision to make, stay and keep shape, or come out and attack the ball, knowing there'll be someone drifting into the voids he leaves.

We've been missing that for years. We haven't had a player that does that consistently since Gerrard at his peak.

Henderson probably has the physique for it, but probably doesn't have the top speed Stevie did when he was younger. Maybe Lallana can add it. I haven't seem him play too much.

[Prof]

What we missed yesterday was space in the centre of the field.  The drive needed to be in wide areas, but the speed of passing was too low.  That was the single biggest issue.  Move the ball quicker, create 1 v 1s and 2 v 1s on the wings, drive and pull defenders out of shape.

[fcsantos]

I thought Brendan took a calculated risk in this game, if we would have won with all the new starters it would have given all of the newbies a lift, confidence and put pressure on the established players to improve upon their performances from last year.

It also said "I trust you"...It didn't work, we conceded a stupid goal and I don't think we had the confidence to get back into the game.

Tactics.

I think it's a bad move to play Balo or an ill Balo (not sure yet) on his own upfront.  He didn't get a second on the ball and had very little movement around him.  Balo is going to be a handful, but, not on his own.

-- Saying that, Villa did a great job on us, fair play.

Players

I thought Markovic struggled more than anyone on his full debut, he didn't seem to have the right weight on his pass or make the right decisions, I was really impressed with his Man City cameo, but, I think everyone struggled in this game.

Coutinho

I know nothing much come off for him but he set a great example of trying to make things happen with very little movement around him and you seen when Sterling come on, he got more space (in Joe Allen's role which I think is his best position behind Sterling in the 442 diamond) his passes were hitting and he looked more dangerous.

I would have started:

                  Stevie
 Henderson       
                         Coutinho

          Lallana

                     
                       Sterling
         Balo

I think we should start the above tomorrow as well.

[Mr Dilkington]

I need to watch the game again, mate, as well. I didn't mean to suggest that MY assessment was the correct one.

I wish I had the time to watch it again to be honest.

I mean I probably do, but it's bloody tough to muster the motivation to sit through it again knowing we lost.

Genuinely thought Markovic was average, but a lot of that was due to Villa's set up. There was no space to work in.

[itsgunnabebarnes!]

Too many players who are similar trying to do the same job.

Henderson 4 yards from Gerrard holding hands in the semi circle, continuo and Lallana trying to dictate play, Markovic and Balotelli trying to hold the ball etc. It was a cluttered mess of too many players not doing what they're on the pitch for.

[TSC]

Moreno had a great chance to square to an unmarked Markovic but 'lacked that bit of quality".  I.e. was slightly ponderous and then imprecise in his delivery.

Thought he was going to try a Spurs type finish with that one.  With hindsight obviously he should have.  A save may well have dropped to Markovic anyway.

[.adam]

I see people talking about Henderson playing alongside Gerrard as if it was part of the plan (to play a 4-2-3-1).

As far as I could tell, the reason Henderson came deep is because Gerrard was being man-marked by Agbonlahor and couldn't start the attacks.

Henderson came deep to try to perform the same function for the side (albeit less effectively) and Gerrard subsequently played a little further up the pitch than he normally would.

[redmark]

The biggest faux pas for me though, was Brendan using Jordan to 'protect' Stevie. Allen/Can being injured obviously didn't help. Especially given that Lucas appears to have been phased out barring real emergencies.

We missed Jordans running, and linking the midfield to our number 10, and as a result Coutinho had to keep dropping back into our own half to collect the ball. In turn this meant a chasm opened up between our '10' and our front 3. This was easy pickings for their back 4, and the Delph/Cleverly pairing.

While I agree in part with the second paragraph quoted, I think the first is mistaking the intention. Henderson in the '2' doesn't 'protect' Gerrard - who if anything has to do more defensive work in the 2, than as the 1 behind a 2; in theory - against Villa he had to do little defensively at all. The selection of the '2' I think was to 'protect' Coutinho, as in liberate him from defensive work and shape almost entirely. In the absence of Sturridge (and Sterling), I think the plan was to put out a system that compensated with an extra entirely 'attacking' player.

Of course, the front four was almost entirely dysfunctional. Lallana was extremely quiet, with the excuse of match fitness and seemed to be coming into the game gradually. Looking back at the stats, I'm surprised Markovic had as many touches as he did (still about half or less than almost all of those deeper than him), but few were of any note; he seemed slightly overawed and kept things very safe. Balotelli either demonstrated that he's not best suited to playing as a lone striker, or can be bullied out of a game worryingly easily. Coutinho was disappointing and frustrating, but perhaps suffered most from the dysfunction and lack of movement around and ahead of him. The fullbacks had plenty of the ball, but did little with it when needing to offer width and a bit of pace.

I do agree that Henderson saw too much of the ball, too deep. His strength is running onto the ball and playing the way he's facing, at high tempo. He did make a few (possibly decoy) runs ahead of the ball (and usually ahead of Coutinho), but they had no more conviction than our play in general. I don't particularly like the 4231 (at least, the commonly perceived version which has a couple of DMs in it), but it may be the system Rodgers believes is the one to unpick parked defences, because it brings in that additional attacking player - and given the lack of ambition of the opposition, should still allow one of the two to break forwards. We have a lot of players whose best position would be one of that three (including Balotelli, who a number nine is not) and this may be the formation that maximises their numbers on the pitch.

The 'weaknesses' of the two being discussed in various threads at the moment were not infact exposed in this game (we were not overrun, we maintained possession with ease), other than Henderson's position on the ball - too deep, to avoid the space occupied by Coutinho; not picked out when venturing further forward. Yet against such teams, Henderson's not going to get those situations anyway. His high energy, high pressing is negated against a side happy to hoof into the corners and try to win set pieces. What is required - and what is not Henderson's natural game - is a bit of composure, delicate touch and invention in tighter spaces deep in the opposition half, in front of the defence; not an ability to break into non-existent space behind it. Again, the injury-delayed incorporation of Lallana may have impacted our approach in these games; the intention may be to play only one of Gerrard/Henderson (and Henderson can play that role if he's not being overly pressed), with more intricate attacking players in the positions ahead.

Overall however, it's difficult to get away from the fundamental issues being a lack of movement and energy from the front, seeping back through the side. There was a lot of ponderous sideways passing, precisely because there were no better options. One hopes that those issues are due to illness, injury and lack of familiarity and will be less of an issue going forwards.

[B0151?]

I don't think the shape was perfect, not a fan of the 4-2-3-1 at all. However I do think that with a more cohesive and sharp attack, a defence that doesn't give up a goal so easily, we probably do get the win. They sound like two massive things, but I guess what I'm saying is our options were limited in the middle with Can and Allen out. Rodgers saw the problem of Gerrard being swamped and tried to address it in the belief the other areas of our game would be enough to beat Villa.

There are some legitimate other concerns within that set-up though. What does Balotelli do? Is it his job to be the linking target man or should he be a permanent fixture in the box? Just how effective is Coutinho at no. 10? I think it's fair to say that his best games last season came from playing that Modric role. I'm especially unsure about a Coutinho and Balotelli partnership. Just not sure how it works at all. I think getting the best out of Balotelli is going to be a tough one. I think he does have it in him to play as a lone striker, I'm just not quite sure how. I really do think that is one that the training ground can sort out, if Balotelli's prepared to put in the work.

[redmark]

As far as I could tell, the reason Henderson came deep is because Gerrard was being man-marked by Agbonlahor and couldn't start the attacks.

This seemed to be highlighted with a single clip by the post-match analysts and become 'fact', but I think is completely overstated. Gerrard had 107 touches of the ball. He was involved plenty. Henderson came deep (and had even more touches), I think, because Coutinho came deep. We played deep because - far from being 'man-marked' - that's where the space was (Agbonlahor may have man-marked for about 20 minutes, before being knackered). Gerrard had space and time to hit a few long diagonals, but the restriction of those as a weapon was the depth and numbers of Villa's defence, not anything Agbonlahor did.

[LondonLFCFan]

Villa were playing like the kind of teams that has been frustrating us. We are still not able to win anything against teams that line up defensively.
We had lots of possession, lots of passes, trying with earnest at times, BUT... frustration sets in.... and we get kicked in the nuts by surprised.

Even last year when we had Suarez, Sturridge and Sterling, we still came out badly playing against teams that knows how to play us using this formation.

Really frustrating watching our attacking midfielders and forwards on the ball and looking around like they are wondering what to do next.

Playing against 2 banks of 5 is our nemesis... sighh 

[L666KOP]

Villa were playing like the kind of teams that has been frustrating us. We are still not able to win anything against teams that line up defensively.
We had lots of possession, lots of passes, trying with earnest at times, BUT... frustration sets in.... and we get kicked in the nuts by surprised.

Even last year when we had Suarez, Sturridge and Sterling, we still came out badly playing against teams that knows how to play us using this formation.

Really frustrating watching our attacking midfielders and forwards on the ball and looking around like they are wondering what to do next.

Playing against 2 banks of 5 is our nemesis... sighh 

But honestly, how many times last season did it happen ?

It's not a great problem in the grand scheme of things.

And our summer acquisitions should help us greatly once they have settled in, three ways to unsettle a defensive unit like that,
1) A player that can run, with the ball, at pace, at the heart of the defence. Markovic
2) Fast one touch intricate passing to draw the defense out of shape, Markovic/Llallana.
3) If all else fails hoik it up to the big man. Lambert.

[killer-heels]

This seemed to be highlighted with a single clip by the post-match analysts and become 'fact', but I think is completely overstated. Gerrard had 107 touches of the ball. He was involved plenty. Henderson came deep (and had even more touches), I think, because Coutinho came deep. We played deep because - far from being 'man-marked' - that's where the space was (Agbonlahor may have man-marked for about 20 minutes, before being knackered). Gerrard had space and time to hit a few long diagonals, but the restriction of those as a weapon was the depth and numbers of Villa's defence, not anything Agbonlahor did.

Disagree, it happened alot and even in the 2nd half. They targetted Gerrard and Gerrard was moving all over the place to allow Henderson some space in the centre.

[redmark]

Disagree, it happened alot and even in the 2nd half. They targetted Gerrard and Gerrard was moving all over the place to allow Henderson some space in the centre.

And yet Gerrard had 107 touches of the ball (Henderson, from memory, 132). If Agbonlahor was marking Gerrard, he was shit at it. Gerrard and Henderson were both making little runs ahead of the ball, but more I think to make space for Coutinho dropping deep (and perhaps to compensate for the lack of movement from the three ahead of them). Regardless, it's absurd to say a player with over 100 touches in a game was 'marked out of it'.

[Hank Scorpio]

Think it's important to note that Rodgers has generally improved players over time.  You look at examples like Skrtel, Flanagan, Henderson, Sterling, Sturridge and even Suarez.  It's a player-centric approach which is reflected in the team.

We need to let him work with the half a dozen or so players we've brought in.  The point is that it is kind of being overly optimistic if we think results like this won't happen given the number of new players we have brought in.  It's only natural to look disjointed.  You would expect to see progress as the season goes on.  Fortunately for us we have plenty of games so the experience of playing competitive football is literally only days away each time.

A good season would see us finish with a trophy and remain in the top 4 while integrating the new players.  Planning for next season may revolve around adding only 2/3 players, even in key positions, for next season.  Similar to what Chelsea have done this summer.

[007.lankyguy]

And yet Gerrard had 107 touches of the ball (Henderson, from memory, 132). If Agbonlahor was marking Gerrard, he was shit at it. Gerrard and Henderson were both making little runs ahead of the ball, but more I think to make space for Coutinho dropping deep (and perhaps to compensate for the lack of movement from the three ahead of them). Regardless, it's absurd to say a player with over 100 touches in a game was 'marked out of it'.

Yeah, I don't think Agbonlahor did a particularly good job marking Gerrard either, though it was very clearly a responsibility he'd been given.

Aston Villa actually played for the first five minutes or so in a 4-3-1-2 with Richardson in the hole behind Weimann and Agbonlahor, which naturally meant that Richardson was the one who picked up Gerrard very early on. Clearly Lambert only planned to play that shape for a few minutes as a ruse to try and confuse us when they switched to 4-5-1 and, I imagine, to also put pressure on us through the middle in the opening stages with two forwards and a midfielder in the #10 position, trying to stop us getting into an early rhythm. It worked pretty well.

[GrkStav]

While I agree in part with the second paragraph quoted, I think the first is mistaking the intention. Henderson in the '2' doesn't 'protect' Gerrard - who if anything has to do more defensive work in the 2, than as the 1 behind a 2; in theory - against Villa he had to do little defensively at all. The selection of the '2' I think was to 'protect' Coutinho, as in liberate him from defensive work and shape almost entirely. In the absence of Sturridge (and Sterling), I think the plan was to put out a system that compensated with an extra entirely 'attacking' player.

Of course, the front four was almost entirely dysfunctional. Lallana was extremely quiet, with the excuse of match fitness and seemed to be coming into the game gradually. Looking back at the stats, I'm surprised Markovic had as many touches as he did (still about half or less than almost all of those deeper than him), but few were of any note; he seemed slightly overawed and kept things very safe. Balotelli either demonstrated that he's not best suited to playing as a lone striker, or can be bullied out of a game worryingly easily. Coutinho was disappointing and frustrating, but perhaps suffered most from the dysfunction and lack of movement around and ahead of him. The fullbacks had plenty of the ball, but did little with it when needing to offer width and a bit of pace.

I do agree that Henderson saw too much of the ball, too deep. His strength is running onto the ball and playing the way he's facing, at high tempo. He did make a few (possibly decoy) runs ahead of the ball (and usually ahead of Coutinho), but they had no more conviction than our play in general. I don't particularly like the 4231 (at least, the commonly perceived version which has a couple of DMs in it), but it may be the system Rodgers believes is the one to unpick parked defences, because it brings in that additional attacking player - and given the lack of ambition of the opposition, should still allow one of the two to break forwards. We have a lot of players whose best position would be one of that three (including Balotelli, who a number nine is not) and this may be the formation that maximises their numbers on the pitch.

The 'weaknesses' of the two being discussed in various threads at the moment were not infact exposed in this game (we were not overrun, we maintained possession with ease), other than Henderson's position on the ball - too deep, to avoid the space occupied by Coutinho; not picked out when venturing further forward. Yet against such teams, Henderson's not going to get those situations anyway. His high energy, high pressing is negated against a side happy to hoof into the corners and try to win set pieces. What is required - and what is not Henderson's natural game - is a bit of composure, delicate touch and invention in tighter spaces deep in the opposition half, in front of the defence; not an ability to break into non-existent space behind it. Again, the injury-delayed incorporation of Lallana may have impacted our approach in these games; the intention may be to play only one of Gerrard/Henderson (and Henderson can play that role if he's not being overly pressed), with more intricate attacking players in the positions ahead.

Overall however, it's difficult to get away from the fundamental issues being a lack of movement and energy from the front, seeping back through the side. There was a lot of ponderous sideways passing, precisely because there were no better options. One hopes that those issues are due to illness, injury and lack of familiarity and will be less of an issue going forwards.

I continue to maintain that Lallana and Markovic did as instructed, did their jobs. If the plan was to have Coutinho be the Sterling equivalent in 2 front-men formation, we may have been better off going traditional 442 with Lallana and Markovic sort of tucked in, a la 4222, with Coutinho and Balotelli as in a 1-1 set up.

[Black Bull Nova]

I think there was a spark missing, Mario seems to be requiring re-igniting (stand back), Gerrard is no longer the firestarter he was, although still invaluable, hindsight suggests that Sterling would have been good from the go as he looked like the only one, but then hindsight is a smartarse's refuge.