Topic: The Level 3 Thread

[Juan Loco]

I think you're right.  I've snipped them out of Degs' post where he quoted himself. 

Cheers, certainly seems to have helped things a little.

After we went down to 10 men, that was Carragher's game.  He revels in that situation.  Before that, when he was asked to play with the ball at his feet, he looked like half the player. 

Agreed. There'll always be a place for Carragher, especially in games like the derby and against the top teams where we do tend to go a bit backs to the wall. It's the same as Kuyt though. I just don't think he's needed when we're playing shite. You look at the Mancs and apart from in goal there are 10 players on the pitch who can do something in an attacking sense. Y'know, even Neville can put in a good cross, and Ferdinand - whilst his footballing ability is grossly overrated (and his defensive ability, until recently, underrated) - can set into the opposition half seamlessly. The same thing was true of Chelsea when they won the league. Carvalho was a libero and Terry was a threat on set pieces. Carra is neither, he's a pure defender.

We're going out there and from minute one the opposition know they have less threat from all over the pitch to deal with than when they play United.

To repeat myself - I think the modern game when you're asking your attack to be able to contribute defensively - although that shouldn't be the only reason they're out there - I think you've got to be able to ask your defence to contribute offensively. Especially when you're a top team like we are.

Hell, is that even a new thing? Rush defended from the front, Phil Neal got into the box with regularity, Hansen moved into midfield, I think I'm right in saying that Thompson and Hughes had no problem doing so either. It's not exactly a new thing is it?

[kaz1983]

Even though I haven't posted in here of late I'm still here reading ...

Oh and there has been some great stuff written since the loss Wenesday night ...

Alot of it has summed up how I feel.

[royhendo]

Regarding the squad comparisons... I think we do have the quality. I suppose it's about relative strengths- we're very strong in talent in midfield and defence. Gerrard and Torres, in attack, are 2 of the very, very best players in the world let alone the league. I do think we have *enough* quality (albeit not top drawer players) out wide too- Babel, Riera, Yossi and Kuyt can all do a job in supporting the main 2 attackers. I think it's an issue of team mentality- the players and the management/coaches, I don't think, have shown they have it in them to sustain a level of consistency in the way Chelsea and Man U have in the last 3-4 years. That's the difference I think.

First up I always think you're balanced in your criticism Baz - nobody could accuse you of knee jerking mate and nobody's going to do that here - you're a reasonable bloke and you make very reasonable points in a very reasonable way.

On the quality issue, I don't agree - we're a level short of our only current remaining competitor in the domestic 'level 3' stakes - Man Utd.

I'd agree we're potentially as strong in the central defensive positions.

Full backs... we're short of their level...

Central midfield...

We have Gerrard, Alonso, Mascherano, Lucas, Spearing, Plessis... (potentially Yossi).

We have Carrick, Fletcher, Scholes, Park, Giggs, Possebon, (Hargreaves injured)

So we're marginally stronger at the top end but have less quality in depth, no?

Wide midfield/wings... we're weaker full stop.

Strikers... far less quality in depth.

And yes - that's a crucial point - Man Utd's entire staff have experience of multiple championship wins - we have a lot less, particularly in the domestic context.

---

Anyway, Carra... yes he did well for the most part, but at the very death he and Arbeloa managed not to block the shot. We're developing a bad habit of getting bent out of shape right at the death in games, and that for me is the epitome of everything that isn't level 3.

I'm in a right funk just now though so it's probably unfair that. It's clear that the squad isn't strong enough to support a push on four fronts though - that speaks for itself.

[royhendo]

I think the modern game when you're asking your attack to be able to contribute defensively - although that shouldn't be the only reason they're out there - I think you've got to be able to ask your defence to contribute offensively. Especially when you're a top team like we are.

Completely agree and it's the transition we need to make in a nutshell... and the transition I'd hoped we'd make way back in the Autumn. We've only shown flashes of it.

Hell, is that even a new thing? Rush defended from the front, Phil Neal got into the box with regularity, Hansen moved into midfield, I think I'm right in saying that Thompson and Hughes had no problem doing so either. It's not exactly a new thing is it?

Definitely not a new thing Juan - it predates Rush, Neal et al as we discussed way back on about page 7 of the thread (in response to a comment like "Imagine Bob Paisley coming out with stuff like this".

This pre-dates even Michels - he just gets the credit for introducing it as a concept.

Anyway - some examples...

Imagine Bob Paisley coming out with stuff like this.I forgot times have moved on though.

To be fair, though, Paisley built a level 3 side, and bought in quality players, often at a young age who then spent time learning the 'Liverpool way.'

In fact, is the RM method very much the difficult to define 'Liverpool Way' - mentality, winners, pass and move but know how to win ugly, no star culture, inculcate new players into the club's culture, invisible board?

It might have been more instinctive with Bill & Bob, but I would suggest they were absolutely advocates of this way of thinking, wouldn't you?

Be interested to know the original poster's opinion on whether our glorious past is a great example of exactly what he/ RM have advocated.

enjoyed this post a lot - thanks! also loads of others by the way, and some really high quality ones, but especially this one.

the fact our bootroom greats sat in a bootroom with pots of tea, or jumped in the vauxhall viva and tanked it up to gretna for a pie and chips and a cuppa with jock stein - it doesn't make the things they talked about any less theoretical or any less ahead of their time than what rinus michels talks about in his book. the bootroom was the ultimate university of football, and shanks was close friends with some of the greatest thinkers in the game.

just because RM's dutch, and because there's all this academic theoretical mystique about his methods, it doesn't mean it's any different to what went on under Shanks and Paisley, or indeed at Celtic under Stein.

both clubs enjoyed long periods of what we've tagged 'level 3 football' where they enjoyed sustained domination domestically and won trophies on the continent. your point's exactly right. and it's worth reminding people that people still come over here from the continent to do their coaching qualifications.

just because our methods were down to earth, it doesn't make them any less sophisticated. and just because Rinus Michels conjures up images of a theoretician in a lab coat, doesn't mean he was any less down to earth than we were.

It's people like Brian Glanville who perpetuate these myths - blah blah 'hellenio herrera' blah blah 'the great inter milan of the 60s' and all that garbage. it's a working man's game, but working men's brains work just as well as those of their aristocratic counterparts.

...thinking about Shanks and football theory. On the face of it you'd think he'd dismiss it as blather - a "simple game complicated by fools" etc. But I wonder whether that wasn't sometimes just for show. It's a matter of record that he fundamentally changed the way we played from the back after back-to-back defeats by Red Star Belgrade. And although he dismissed Ajax as "lucky" after they stuffed us 5-0 in Amsterdam, I'd be amazed if this hadn't forced an epic re-think in the Boot Room as well.

[Hank Scorpio]

Agreed. There'll always be a place for Carragher, especially in games like the derby and against the top teams where we do tend to go a bit backs to the wall. It's the same as Kuyt though. I just don't think he's needed when we're playing shite. You look at the Mancs and apart from in goal there are 10 players on the pitch who can do something in an attacking sense. Y'know, even Neville can put in a good cross, and Ferdinand - whilst his footballing ability is grossly overrated (and his defensive ability, until recently, underrated) - can set into the opposition half seamlessly. The same thing was true of Chelsea when they won the league. Carvalho was a libero and Terry was a threat on set pieces. Carra is neither, he's a pure defender.

We're going out there and from minute one the opposition know they have less threat from all over the pitch to deal with than when they play United.

To repeat myself - I think the modern game when you're asking your attack to be able to contribute defensively - although that shouldn't be the only reason they're out there - I think you've got to be able to ask your defence to contribute offensively. Especially when you're a top team like we are.

That's just it, especially the part in bold.

What better summed it up then when Skrtel ate up 50-60 yards bombing out of defence to pass to Benayoun and then thought 'What the fuck am I doing here?', as if he had burst through some tactical forcefield anf then thought that's not supposed to happen, and left YB to get on with it.  He became a passenger; a player not actively involved in the play.  And that is the problem, there are too many passengers in attack. 

Defensively, it's great, because, more or less, everybody contributes and if you do not then you have no place in the team.  As an attacking unit, what makes it even worse, is when Kuyt is occupying one of the positions.  His lack of technical ability and speed leave a huge burden on the forward players.  Torres was completely isolated last night, even before the sending off.  The Everton players double/triple teamed him safe in the knowledge that others wouldn't exploit the gaps left by this.

[matchyg]

How come Chelsea are so great against poor teams, if pressured they unravel, as opposed to the Liverpool, who can't unlock poor teams. And only if pressured by opposition can then score, when there is more space?  It's like polar opposites. Is it the players, manager or mentality?

[royhendo]

It's a mixture of players and tactical mentality for me Matchyg. The last 10 pages are devoted to exactly that conundrum.

[b_joseph]

How come Chelsea are so great against poor teams, if pressured they unravel, as opposed to the Liverpool, who can't unlock poor teams. And only if pressured by opposition can then score, when there is more space?  It's like polar opposites. Is it the players, manager or mentality?

To be fair..Chelsea have had their fair share of shit results against poor teams...especially at home.

What better summed it up then when Skrtel ate up 50-60 yards bombing out of defence to pass to Benayoun and then thought 'What the fuck am I doing here?', as if he had burst through some tactical forcefield anf then thought that's not supposed to happen, and left YB to get on with it.  He became a passenger; a player not actively involved in the play.  And that is the problem, there are too many passengers in attack. 

That pissed me right off that did. I was screaming for him to just bomb into the box and give Yossi another target to cross for. Quite a few people around me..more or les everyone around felt the same way.
Compare that to John Terry..Terry would have carried on going.


Baz - yep. It was a shame because our guys were already tired. It was silly of us to just chase the ball around for an extra 40+ minutes.

[royhendo]

These chalkboards are perfect for cross-examining the idea that we're rigid in our movement by the way. If what we're saying is right, we should see Man United players with a more even distribution of dots across the length and breadth of the pitch, whereas with our side, we ought to see the dots and arrows restricted to certain zones...

...saying that it's difficult to generalise because some players shift positions I guess...

...and it'd take ages and just tell us something we already know...

...so maybe best not bother.

[BazC]

First up I always think you're balanced in your criticism Baz - nobody could accuse you of knee jerking mate and nobody's going to do that here - you're a reasonable bloke and you make very reasonable points in a very reasonable way.

On the quality issue, I don't agree - we're a level short of our only current remaining competitor in the domestic 'level 3' stakes - Man Utd.

I'd agree we're potentially as strong in the central defensive positions.

Full backs... we're short of their level...

Central midfield...

We have Gerrard, Alonso, Mascherano, Lucas, Spearing, Plessis... (potentially Yossi).

We have Carrick, Fletcher, Scholes, Park, Giggs, Possebon, (Hargreaves injured)

So we're marginally stronger at the top end but have less quality in depth, no?

Wide midfield/wings... we're weaker full stop.

Strikers... far less quality in depth.

And yes - that's a crucial point - Man Utd's entire staff have experience of multiple championship wins - we have a lot less, particularly in the domestic context.

---

Anyway, Carra... yes he did well for the most part, but at the very death he and Arbeloa managed not to block the shot. We're developing a bad habit of getting bent out of shape right at the death in games, and that for me is the epitome of everything that isn't level 3.

I'm in a right funk just now though so it's probably unfair that. It's clear that the squad isn't strong enough to support a push on four fronts though - that speaks for itself.

Well I suppose if we get down to the man for man comparisons, then yes- we probably do have an inferior squad to Man U... however, I do believe in the notion of a team being "greater than the sum of its parts" and I think that 'invisible' addition to make it so is the idea of quality at the macro level (rather than the micro level of player to player comparisons).

Perhaps to push us on in this aspect we need that mentality- which I guess comes with experience. Something we don't have of winning the league. Looking at the CL for example- in 4-5 years Rafa's not only turned us into CL regulars, he's turned us into a true powerhouse in that competition. We've beaten almost every top side in Europe in that competition under him. But that winning mentality hasn't come in the league yet for some reason. And I think that's where the problem is. The mental approach to it. And like I said- I don't think it's right from Rafa and his whole team.

In terms of quality of the team in Europe for example- we're right up there... we were laughed at when the idea of us beating Barca came up. Not only did we beat them, we shat on them. Man for man they were much better. As a team we were much better. Same for Inter, Juve, Chelsea, Arsenal... and other teams we've beaten in Europe. The mental approach and the technical approach were/are great. In the league, that harmony is more a cacophony with few and sporadic melodies of absolute beauty, but it's still not a complete score.

[the_prodigal_s0n]

What better summed it up then when Skrtel ate up 50-60 yards bombing out of defence to pass to Benayoun and then thought 'What the fuck am I doing here?', as if he had burst through some tactical forcefield anf then thought that's not supposed to happen, and left YB to get on with it.  He became a passenger; a player not actively involved in the play.  And that is the problem, there are too many passengers in attack. 

That's a major problem in our play. When certain players arrive in the opposition half, they're merely making up numbers. They generally contribute very little. On occasion they'll produce something useful, but more often when the ball comes to them they'll look to offload it as quickly as possible to a player nearby. They're not willing to try the unexpected and force the opposition into a mistake.

When we get close to the opposition box we don't have nearly enough players who attempt a moment of brilliance, which just results in either our play breaking down or the ball going sideways in front of the opposing teams bank of players with nobody having a clue what to do.

That doesn't happen as much with the Mancs. Even if their players have little "footballing" ability, they're willing to try something. An example of this is in the Everton game (where the Mancs were pretty shit). John O'Shea, who has fuck all ability on the ball, put a lovely through ball into the box for Carrick and they could have got a penalty out of it. In our case, it's not totally the fault of whoever has the ball, as the movement isn't usually there in front of him, so it is a two-fold problem. We need to improve drastically on both counts. As you said, there are far too many passengers in attack.

[royhendo]

What's described here is almost the antithesis of the Michels model really.

[-Sad Fuck-]

Does anyone feel Alonso should be perhaps be getting more goals?

Just looking at soccerbase and other sites, it's quoted as Albelda getting 5 goals in 4 seasons prior to Benitez coming here. Albelda was the one of the '2' which never really went forward, a la Mascherano. Baraja on the other hand, was given the license to join the attack, and appeared to get on the scoresheet more regularly than Alonso ever has.

Having watched Alonso, he's superior to Baraja in almost every way, perhaps bar his tenacity and tackling. I'm trying to think of why Alonso's only managed around half the goals Baraja did, who actually managed 7 and 8 league goals at one point.

Anyone feel he should be given the license to get forward a bit more?

[kaz1983]

Does anyone feel Alonso should be perhaps be getting more goals?

Just looking at soccerbase and other sites, it's quoted as Albelda getting 5 goals in 4 seasons prior to Benitez coming here. Albelda was the one of the '2' which never really went forward, a la Mascherano. Baraja on the other hand, was given the license to join the attack, and appeared to get on the scoresheet more regularly than Alonso ever has.

Having watched Alonso, he's superior to Baraja in almost every way, perhaps bar his tenacity and tackling. I'm trying to think of why Alonso's only managed around half the goals Baraja did, who actually managed 7 and 8 league goals at one point.

Anyone feel he should be given the license to get forward a bit more?

He has been recently getting forward quite often though and shots on target ...

It's just in the past having Sissoko playing futher up the pitch meant Alonso had sit infront of the four and dictate the play from deep, he was brillant at it and in that time we hardly ever saw Alonso in the opponents final third ... then came Masch and we all thought Alonso would be hitting the edge of the box regularly but it didn't happen as we thought but since the start of this season Alonso has been getting forward more often and getting shots on target, it's just he isn't the type of midfielder to steam forward and get a decent amount of goals from midfield every season - what we should hoping for is Alonso get forward and providing some good thur balls for Gerrard, Riera, Torres to get on the end of ... thats what I'd like to see.

[redmeanmachine]

Does anyone feel Alonso should be perhaps be getting more goals?

Just looking at soccerbase and other sites, it's quoted as Albelda getting 5 goals in 4 seasons prior to Benitez coming here. Albelda was the one of the '2' which never really went forward, a la Mascherano. Baraja on the other hand, was given the license to join the attack, and appeared to get on the scoresheet more regularly than Alonso ever has.

Having watched Alonso, he's superior to Baraja in almost every way, perhaps bar his tenacity and tackling. I'm trying to think of why Alonso's only managed around half the goals Baraja did, who actually managed 7 and 8 league goals at one point.

Anyone feel he should be given the license to get forward a bit more?

Good observation. Maybe that's why Rafa is willing to offload Xabi last summer to bring in Barry?

[-Sad Fuck-]

Possibly, although I don't think we want to drag this topic into a Barry/Alonso debate

BMW, agree completeley. A great example of this was last night, when Alonso played a through ball Fabregas would have been proud of (I say that as Fabregas is better than Alonso, but I'm saying it as though I'm one who fall for the media hype of him ). Credit to Howard, he chased it down and Riera wasn't really at fauly, although Torres would have probably dinked it over Tim had be been there.

Still, Alonso doesn't need to play the 'pick the ball up from the centreback and ping to Kuyt/Riera' role all the time. Mascherano's passing ability is far greater than people give him credit for, let him do some of what Alonso's doing in the team atm, and let Xabi get some more shots! He's the best striker of the ball, besides Gerrard that is (Although he looks far more comfortable when he strikes his 30 yarders).

[Hank Scorpio]

Does anyone feel Alonso should be perhaps be getting more goals?

Still, Alonso doesn't need to play the 'pick the ball up from the centreback and ping to Kuyt/Riera' role all the time. Mascherano's passing ability is far greater than people give him credit for, let him do some of what Alonso's doing in the team atm, and let Xabi get some more shots! He's the best striker of the ball, besides Gerrard that is (Although he looks far more comfortable when he strikes his 30 yarders).

This is something that has been under discussion recently to quite some extent.

For me, it is more to do with our style of play and tactics rather than the merits of an individual player.  The midfield '2' hardly ever leave their area when we are in possession.  This area is approx. 10 yards either side of the halfway line.  I think their job is to always be available for a pass and be prepared for the opposition's counter attack.  I think this heavily contributes to our defensive stability but leaves us with less options going forward.

If you watch Europe's top sides, you will see movement not only in wide areas and from the strikers, but from the midfield also.  The deepest man in midfield will have options to his left, right, centre (forwards) and, of course, backwards.  The difference with us is that we don't seem to have that easy/obvious forward pass.  XA/JM are often left to look to the wings or square/backwards.  If they do want to play it forwards they have to bypass a big area of the pitch and play it long.  That leaves the attackers isolated and normally fighting against an unfair advantage (3 on 1).

Another major issue, again this is my opinion, is that the midfielders pick the ball up too deep.  They are literally stepping on the toes of the centre backs when they do so.  This means that even if they do manage a forward, creative pass, the recipient is picking the ball up 50 yards from the opposition goal and with a hell of a lot of work (with little help) to do before a goal scoring opportunity is created.

I have heard/read a lot of personnel but our style of play as an attacking unit needs some serious analysis.

[bryanod]

Another major problem I have with how we set up, (alongide the 4-attacking players problem) is how we constantly set up our formation and strategy to play to team's strengths, be it united, wigan, everton.

By this, I mean we will always play Kuyt on the wing to conteract Ashley Cole for example, or play Hyypia at home to protect  against lower teams hoofing the ball.

Do you see united or chelsea do this? Not very much, if at all.

We should let them worry about us, let them worry about having to defend Agger marauding into the midfield with the ball at his feet. Deal with our winger getting in behind Cole when he inevitably gives the ball away, let them deal with our formationa dn players and change to try and defend against it.

By changing our tactics like this, we nearly play into their hands.

We should play the team and tactics we want to play and our players are best suited, then try and get one or two little bits of tactics to try and identity their WEAKNESSES not their strenghts. Look how well it worked for Everton against us from corners with Cahill coming in late, a well-publicised 'weakness' that they utilized.

[royhendo]

We shouldn't forget that we are also one of the top sides in Europe by the way, restricted movement and chronic balance problems notwithstanding. The thing is, deprived of Gerrard, it'll be interesting to revisit how the system works. We felt in early season that we could get results without both Gerrard and Torres, but now as a rule Liverpool fans are panicking about it, like we suddenly believe again that we're a one- or two-man team.

If there's a level 3 test, it's coming now.

[Juan Loco]

Another major problem I have with how we set up, (alongide the 4-attacking players problem) is how we constantly set up our formation and strategy to play to team's strengths, be it united, wigan, everton.

By this, I mean we will always play Kuyt on the wing to conteract Ashley Cole for example, or play Hyypia at home to protect  against lower teams hoofing the ball.

Do you see united or chelsea do this? Not very much, if at all.

We should let them worry about us, let them worry about having to defend Agger marauding into the midfield with the ball at his feet. Deal with our winger getting in behind Cole when he inevitably gives the ball away, let them deal with our formationa dn players and change to try and defend against it.

By changing our tactics like this, we nearly play into their hands.

We should play the team and tactics we want to play and our players are best suited, then try and get one or two little bits of tactics to try and identity their WEAKNESSES not their strenghts. Look how well it worked for Everton against us from corners with Cahill coming in late, a well-publicised 'weakness' that they utilized.

I think United do it alot more than people pick up on. Who was it on the wing against us? Rooney. Ferguson constantly plays Park against the better teams to negate their fullbacks. They also went 4-5-1 alot last year and even put Ronaldo through the middle because he wouldn't track back like Rooney would on the flanks.

It's not just us and to be honest, whilst it's not going to bring about good football, I think Kuyt on the right against United/Arsenal/Chelsea is a necessary evil. A lot of their player comes from the fullbacks, and if you can stop Cole or Clichy crossing the half way line, or have them under constant pressure when they receive the ball, it takes away a lot of their game.

I don't even think we change our tactics that much to be honest, that's the problem. Kuyt works against the better teams due to his nuisance value and the fact that their fullbacks are there to do damage. He's shite against the lesser teams because - and I know I'm repeating myself - Zola and Hodgson couldn't give a monkeys if Ilunga or Konchesky don't cross the half way line. It's not damaging the result they came for. When Cole or Evra can't though it is a problem for their teams. They're not used to playing without the fullbacks in the attacking half of the pitch.

What pisses me off is that we seem to think that against the shite we can only negate the fullbacks by having a workhorse on the right, or two stoppers at the back. United negate opposition teams by having better ball players at the back and on the wings that can dominate possession and isolate any threat up front from the rest of their team. We always leave an out ball to opposition teams.

Got no problem with identifying the strengths of the better teams and trying to combat them. What I hate though is that we assume that this stratergy works against all teams. I don't think we alternate our approach that much at all. We seem to work under the assumption that if it works against the better teams then it'll work just as well against the dross. The reality is that they couldn't give a fuck if we have 8 out field players trying to shut them down, because that only leaves them with two threats to deal with. We're concentrating on them when we should be concentrating on ourselves.

Saying all that, whilst it's not how I like to see football played, but if there was a higher quality of player in certain positions (we know where) then it wouldn't matter a jot.

[b_joseph]

JL - The difference is that Park isnt a liability in the attacking phase.He doesnt get any headlins but he is very useful and consistent in the attacking phase of play....both on the left and the right.
Attacks the full back..good first touch...good positional sense to pick up the odd goal. Decent player.

[Juan Loco]

JL - The difference is that Park isnt a liability in the attacking phase.He doesnt get any headlins but he is very useful and consistent in the attacking phase of play....both on the left and the right.
Attacks the full back..good first touch...good positional sense to pick up the odd goal. Decent player.

No doubt, but let's be fair, first and foremost he's there for workrate and understanding of tactics (The only thing Hiddink is truly brilliant at, but that's for another day), not because he's going to score or create a goal out of nothing.

[b_joseph]

Does anyone feel Alonso should be perhaps be getting more goals?

Just looking at soccerbase and other sites, it's quoted as Albelda getting 5 goals in 4 seasons prior to Benitez coming here. Albelda was the one of the '2' which never really went forward, a la Mascherano. Baraja on the other hand, was given the license to join the attack, and appeared to get on the scoresheet more regularly than Alonso ever has.

Having watched Alonso, he's superior to Baraja in almost every way, perhaps bar his tenacity and tackling. I'm trying to think of why Alonso's only managed around half the goals Baraja did, who actually managed 7 and 8 league goals at one point.

Anyone feel he should be given the license to get forward a bit more?

I'm not sure if he should because its not like he has ever been a scoring option in any season he has played in.
Most CM's who look like scoring goals will get themselves into the box or get themselves running beyond the front men..Xabi never does that and wont score more than the odd goal here and there because of it.

Prime example the other night. Dossena was wide and he put in an awful cross into the box. It was behind both Kuyt and Torres and bounced in between the pen spot and the 18 yard line. Now, a goalscoring CM ( Lampard or Scholes back in the day ) would have turned that cross into something special because they would have been arriving into the box just as that ball was coming onto them.

Scoring goals or wanting to score goals isnt scomething that cant be taught. You either want to do it or you dont. Xabi just doesnt seem like one of those players that has a desire to pop up and have a season where he scoes 10-15 goals.

No doubt, but let's be fair, first and foremost he's there for workrate and understanding of tactics (The only thing Hiddink is truly brilliant at, but that's for another day), not because he's going to score or create a goal out of nothing.

Thats fair. Would you swap them if given the chance?

[Juan Loco]

Thats fair. Would you swap them if given the chance?

Definitely. It really sounds harsh, but I'd do it just so it got rid of the 'kuyt problem' once and for all. I'd do it as much for the fact that it wouldn't give the Rafa the option to keep on putting his tactical blindspot in plain sight, as I would for the fact that Park is a better player.

[royhendo]

I'd agree with that (to the Maxi).

[Degs]

Will be interesting so see how we line up for the City game with Alonso suspended and Gerrard injured.

We don't have the players to fill in the 4-2-3-1 so we might see a return to the 4-4-2 with Lucas again in central midfield, with Mascherano provided he doesn't get booked tomorrow i.e. keeps his mouth shut when the ref blows.

I can't get my head around how he can do any other option, to play Lucas in the holding role again is close to footballing suicide -  the more people become aware of him the more people will target him as the weak link and the man to run off, if he carries on playing there he'll get sent off again and give away penalties.

I would bear no ill will to Rafa if he tried something different.
5-3-2, 3-2-1-3-1 (wing backs), or plays Agger in the middle of the park, it shows a flexibile manager willing to adapt to problems rather than the problems which Chelsea and Scolari face, having no plan B (Chelse play the same system every week, and for the entire 90 minutes).

He has plenty of time to think about it and with more time spent with the reserve players, with all of the big guns off on internationals, I think he might end up throwing the likes of Plessis in there again, or God forbid Jay Spearing (although I don't think he's ready he has the hunger to succeed, so I'm getting him a Brazilian passport, Spearina and Derbinho should get called up soon enough).

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

Degs,

Man City

                                       Torres

             Riera/Babel        Benayoun            Kuyt/Babel

                          Lucas                Masch

That is all

[abhred]

Isn't Masch banned?

[Degs]

Isn't Masch banned?

No, he's on 4 yellows.

[Degs]

Degs,

Man City

                                       Torres

             Riera/Babel        Benayoun            Kuyt/Babel

                          Lucas                Masch

That is all

Cruisin' for a bruisin' again.

[Degs]

I know Veinticinco de Mayo has pickd the right team - the team that will go out.
But for me something like:

------------Torres/Babel-----------

Riera----------Lucas---------Benny

---------Masch-----Agger----------

Is a better alternative, would never happen though.

[kaz1983]

I'd love to see Lucas play in the hole, espeically behind Torres.

[-Sad Fuck-]

Lucas actually played in the 'hole' for about 15 minutes at the Emirates last season, in the 1-1.

He played a wonderful through ball to split the defence, which has Torres been on the end of, we'd have won 2-1. Pity it wasn't Torres, it was Voronin

[-Sad Fuck-]

My simple conclusion from watching this first half:

No Daniel Agger = No Level 3 football.

[Manila Kop]

Holy fuck, what a match.  We've definitely got the winning mentality back at least - aided by the return of the sublime Torres.

Some quick positives:
- Skrtel and Agger at the back.  That's the future (all respect to Carra) and the sooner we see more of Agger the better.  The extra yards of forward movement he provides is invaluable in unsettling the opposition.
- Off the ball movement.  One of my biggest complaints for us, but we were much less static this game, some great interplay especially on the left flank involving Yossi and Fabio.  We cut Pompey to shreds a few times, if only we had better finishing (Babel, chin up lad...).
- Masch taking potshots.  And coming close, I might add.  He got forward, won the ball in the opposition half, and wasn't afraid to unleash the rocket hidden in his right boot.  About fracking time; long may it continue.
- Dirk started scoring.  Seems to score in bunches; let's hope it's the start of another purple patch?  Some good hustle there, and only saw one awful first touch this match.
- Clutch players.  Fabio, Kuyt, Torres - they all stepped up to the plate.  Arguably the likes of Yossi and Masch did their part as well, raising their level when we were going down to level the scoring.  Yossi in particular tore Pompey a new one - way to take the opportunity by the horns.
- Tactical flexibility.  4-3-3 to 3-5-2 to 4-2-3-1, with almost the whole squad being involved in the game.  Oh, and we didn't set up to counter the opposition's strengths this time, in my opinion.  Rafa going for the jugular, but that's not what the press is going to write tomorrow.

Still on a high obviously but I hope that was coherent.

[Degs]

Can I get some points for predicting a mad formation?

I would bear no ill will to Rafa if he tried something different.
5-3-2, 3-2-1-3-1 (wing backs), or plays Agger in the middle of the park, it shows a flexibile manager willing to adapt to problems rather than the problems which Chelsea and Scolari face, having no plan B (Chelse play the same system every week, and for the entire 90 minutes).

We were fucking lucky though.

[Manila Kop]

We were fucking lucky though.

You could say we were unlucky too Degs...some handballs and Babel's horrible miss.  I just like the fact we managed to win through our flexibility.

[-Sad Fuck-]

You could say we were unlucky too Degs...some handballs and Babel's horrible miss.  I just like the fact we managed to win through our flexibility.

Don't forget a disallowed goal and an arguable foul which led to their second goal.

What a performance though.

[Manila Kop]

Don't forget a disallowed goal and an arguable foul which led to their second goal.

What a performance though.

Aye on both counts.  As a wise RAWKite emailed me, the hardest climb is the most fulfilling.

With that thought I'm off to bed mates, look forward to reading the tactical post-mortem tomorrow morning.

[Guz-kop]

Can I get some points for predicting a mad formation?

We were fucking lucky though.

Nugent scoring a goal from an offside position a minute after Babel's shocking open goal miss and then scoring a 2nd straight after Kuyt had a goal wrongly ruled offside? Late wins don't automatically mean lucky either. Rafa has been criticised recently for not 'going for it' or not showing enough flexibility in the way we played. We showed flexibility from the word go with that formation and then was prepared (maybe forced but so what?) to revert to players we didn't want to use and change things around again. It's what quality teams should be doing when the chips are down.

Still a lot of issues out there today which I can't be too arsed in thinking about right this minute but what I will say is that it was good to see the sort of desire and hunger in the 2nd half that we saw earlier in the season. Still absolutely convinced that this team absolutely thrives on being in the underdog status and thats why we were able to raise our game against Chelsea, that's why we were happy to sit back and wait for pens when we went down to 10 men and that's why we have produced so many late wins coming back from behind this season including today. In a weird way losing some ground on United might be the think to spark us back into life. We were chasing Chelsea earlier in the season and hunted them down despite some poor results at home and now we have a target again. Genuine question but how many of our players have experience in winning leagues? Xabi came close with Sociedad. Skrtel, Kuyt or Agger at their former clubs? Not sure but it's nothing compared to United or Chelsea and part of the reason I think we favour much better in an underdog situation.