Topic: That's the annual abomination away at Stoke over with, then - Round Table

[stoa]

The pre-match arguments that “we should plan our own game and don’t worry about Stoke, its not as if they’re a top club” proved ill-judged

I never really got why people say that. What is wrong about knowing where the opposition's strengths and weaknesses are? If you want to win games, you'll probably have to take advantage of the weaknesses and stop them from using their strengths. Only very few teams (like Barcelona) can play the way THEY want and not care about the opposition, but they'll still fail at times. Barca's advantage is that more often then not it's successful for them. And still, I'd imagine they make subtle changes to the way they're playing against certain teams (like taking better care of player X if they know that he's the only real attacking danger). Adjusting to the opposition seems to be looked down on. I just don't know why, because that's the first thought that would come to my mind, if I had to prepare a team for a game...

[MobileBayRed]

Some great analysis from here and elsewhere.

Boils down to this (in my opinion):

-We have 5-8 more points, we go 3 at the back with Coates
-We have a manager who's had more time with his team and system, we go 3 at the back with Coates
-Any of our 3 at the back experiments go a little better, we go 3 at the back with Coates
-We don't batter Fulham, we go 3 at the back with Coates
-Our manager has unflinching faith in his own judgement (disadvantage of a young manager growing into his role), we go 3 at the back with Coates

And all of the above give us a better chance of winning this one particular match.

Through and through we're the young wimpy kid who gets held up by his ankles and shaken down for his change and it'll be that way for a while longer. Saturday was sleazy Uncle Tony molesting us after Christmas dinner; cue self harm. Fortunately in all the films I've seen it's the wimpy kid that wins out in the end...

I'm just not buying this argument that 3 at the back would have changed the outcome at Stoke.  Neither the second nor third goal was in any way emblamatic of a tactical defensive mistake.  Both of those goals came from set pieces (and yes, I consider a Stoke long-throw a set piece) where we had ample time to get our defense organized.  Both goals were simply the result of poor defending.  PERIOD.

Would 3 at the back have given us more space to play out of the back.  Maybe, but consider we already had 63% of possession and managed to get 17 shots away.  As usual, our inability to put shots on goal and in the net were evident, but im not sure how an extra defender would have helped with our shooting accuracy.

[Kop10]

Some great analysis from here and elsewhere.

Boils down to this (in my opinion):

-We have 5-8 more points, we go 3 at the back with Coates
-We have a manager who's had more time with his team and system, we go 3 at the back with Coates
-Any of our 3 at the back experiments go a little better, we go 3 at the back with Coates
-We don't batter Fulham, we go 3 at the back with Coates
-Our manager has unflinching faith in his own judgement (disadvantage of a young manager growing into his role), we go 3 at the back with Coates

And all of the above give us a better chance of winning this one particular match.

Through and through we're the young wimpy kid who gets held up by his ankles and shaken down for his change and it'll be that way for a while longer. Saturday was sleazy Uncle Tony molesting us after Christmas dinner; cue self harm. Fortunately in all the films I've seen it's the wimpy kid that wins out in the end...

I cried with laughter.

Huth is such an intimidating defender by the way. The only player I have ever seen Suarez visible scared of.

[Not A Scouser]

I think it is quite clear that we struggle against two opposition strategies, pressing us high up the pitch, and counterattack with a big, athletic centre forward.  If these are visible to us then they are certainly visible to other managers.  Stoke have the advantage of being set up for both these strategies.

The thing is that Brendan Rodgers' system has solutions for these problems.  For being pressed up the pitch you move the ball quickly past the pressure and then attack quickly with numbers.  For this to happen there must be a player who can receive the ball facing his defence, turn, and move the ball vertically.  The main player for this is the defensive midfielder, Lucas now and Allen earlier in the season.  In this game 9as shown by the average position diagrams earlier in the thread) Stoke targeted Lucas to prevent this.  This delay enabled Stoke to retreat into a solid defensive position.  The solution is to move the ball around this pressure, either with another midfielder coming deeper, but more likely getting the ball wide to a wing back and then immediately back to the middle.  The alternative is long balls over the top of the pressure, but that isn't going to work against Stoke with Suso, Suarez, and Downing up top.

The other problem s the counterattack involving the big guy.  The formation has the numbers available, ( CB and a DM against a maximum of 2 players)but this is still a problem.  against a small team it doesn't matter, Skrtl and Agger will simply win the ball.  Against a bigger player it still shouldn't be much of a problem as long as the pass up field is a hopeful punt.  If the passer has time and space to pick a long pass then troubles arise.  It gives the opposition time to get up the field and support the striker, and also greatly improves the chances of keeping the ball. I think the weakness here derives mostly from our pressure up front, both in retaining the ball (to make the opposition defend deeper and deeper) but also in coherent and intense pressing.  Turning the ball over in the opposing team's penalty area and then pressing hard results in the opposition simply launching it out of panic.  Losing the ball further up the pitch and then not pressing leaves you vulnerable to a counterattack.

I would have picked Coates because we don't move the ball quickly enough and you need a big bastard against Stoke.  Have him attack every long ball.  However, I do admire Rodgers for sticking with a system that can work against these tactics if played well.  In the long run I think making such a brave decision will pay off by, counter-intuitively, getting us to where we want to be quicker.

I have been encouraged recently  We are winning comfortably against most poorer teams and generally we have the look of really good teams.

At the beginning of the season I said we would struggle to start and look really good by the end of the season.  It looks to me as if we are progressing but still have a ways to go.

[Always_A_Red]

The party didn't last long.

You know - the party we'd been planning for when Suarez finally got a penalty decision in his favour? Well, it lasted as long as it took to get over the shock of it being not only awarded, but scored too. In fact, some where probably still chuckling away when Agger and Skrtel failed to deal with a long ball, and Walters equalised with a creditably calm finish.

I was one of those people. Jumping around with me aul fella covered in red smoke bomb having whatcan only be described as a 'fucking great party'and I turn around to see Skrtel slip and Walters slot it in the opposite corner to the one that Pepe had already dived to before he had got the ball at his feet. Devastating to have that end so quickly.Meh.

Speaking of an inability to control things - Jonjo FUCKING Shelvey. He's getting worse with every single game he plays. There's no doubt he has quality, but there's a big difference between having quality and being quality - and the more he plays, the less he looks like he's ever going to be able to make the step up.

The frustrating thing is that BR is continuing to play him even though he's not performing when he has a player of Sahin's quality on the bench. Its a little bit like Kenny last year playing Downing game in, game out even though he wasplaying awful yet he had Kuyt and Maxi on the bench.

So, my question here is "Will Daniel Sturridge help us improve in both boxes?"

Is he good enough to  not only bag goals when we play at the weekend, but to sufficiently challenge Agger and Skrtel enough during training to help them learn how to deal with big units?

I think Sturridge will offer us a different type of player than we have at the moment and he will score goals. He will get the 'tap ins' and he will also play of the shoulder of the last man to get in behind the defence. A couple of times yesterday Luis lost a sprint race with Hugh and Shawcross because thats not his game. Sturridge will draw defenders away from Suarez so that will be create space for him to work his magic without having to beat every man and his dog first.

I dont think he'll help Agger & Skrtel to be honest. He's not type of player. I still find it ridiculous that we got rid of Andy when he could have offered us a different dimension. Thats BR's choice though and he obviously believes that our CB's dont need this type of training for whatever reason??

My second question is this: "With Jonjo Shelvey and Nuri Sahin unwilling to do the dirty work in midfield, Joe Allen too lightweight and suspect during transitions, and Steven Gerrard both too lazy and positionally slack to bother filling in gaps when we lose the ball, how can we close up the gap in front of the two centre backs and become more effective at winning second balls?"

Is Jordan Henderson good enough defensively to sit in alongside Lucas and use his dynamism to press the ball? Or, do we need to buy a physical specimen to play in that destructor role alongside Lucas? Should we be looking to have a dual-protector partnership in the middle a la Mikel - Ramires / sometimes play, especially as we're encouraging both full-backs to attack? How do we fill this massive gap?

I dont really have an answer to this but BR must believe that Allen isthe player to be able to do that. He's spent Ł16m on him to be that player.

My third question is a classic - "What do we need to do with Steven Gerrard?"

He's got all the class and ability in the world, but his legs have gone. We can't play him how United play Scholes, because he doesn't have the discipline and our fowards don't retain possession well enough. He can't play as a central midfielder next to Lucas - he's NEVER been able to play that role.

My preference would be to move him forwards, on the right-hand-side. He's a much more effective player than all our other "wingers" at the moment - he could use that role to whip balls in from wide, or to drive in and link up with Suarez like he did with Torres so well from that position.

The first thing I wouldnt do is offer him a new bloody contract!  He hashis first decent game in 6months against an abject Fulham team and alll of a sudden that deserves a contract extention?

I think the only place he can play is on the right of a front 3 and I think he needs to be rotated/dropped more often.There was a stat the other day that said that he's played more PL games this season at this point in the season than any of his last 5 seasons! How can this be right? Nobody is bigger than this club and at the moment SG is because he is undroppable because of his history with the club and the fact he's the capatain.

If the last 12 months are anything to go by (some would argue 2 years), he should not be a guarenteed first team regular because he is not contributing enough. Another massive decision for BR to make. Does he have the balls to make the right decision for the team and club or will he reward him with a new contract??

Interesting to see whats going on with Lampard at Chelsea.....Very similar situation with Gerrard....one team says thank you but you're not the long term plans of the team, the other offers the player a new extended contract. Go figure.


Safe to say, I think BR got it massively wrong last night.Pulis out thought him tactically on the night which is just depressing in itself. Alot of what I want to say has already been said already but he doesnt seem to be able to learn from his mistakes because we are conceeding goals too easily and they all seem to be the same type of goal too. we have conceeded 2 or more goals in 10 PL gamesthis year. This is not a blip, this is a fundamental problem with the way that BR is setting up his team. We couldnt score last season but we could at least keep it tight at the back. This season we've taken a step back in that department and have not improvedin the final third either.

I hope BR has it in him to be able to spot the errors and be able to rectify them. Only time will tell

[Quaid]

My third question is a classic - "What do we need to do with Steven Gerrard?"

He's got all the class and ability in the world, but his legs have gone. We can't play him how United play Scholes, because he doesn't have the discipline and our fowards don't retain possession well enough. He can't play as a central midfielder next to Lucas - he's NEVER been able to play that role.

My preference would be to move him forwards, on the right-hand-side. He's a much more effective player than all our other "wingers" at the moment - he could use that role to whip balls in from wide, or to drive in and link up with Suarez like he did with Torres so well from that position.

My final, two-fold question is regarding Brendan Rodgers - "What mistakes are we making regularly, and is there evidence that Rodgers and his team are noticing and working on fixing them? Also, is Rodgers' philosophy hindering our short-term progress by trying to implement style over pragmatism at any cost?"

Over to you.

So many have already discussed this before, but I do struggle to understand why Gerrard gets played in a deep/defensive midfield role when we have Lucas, Allen, Sahin and even Henderson all capable of playing that role. Not many players in the world have game intelligence like Gerrard in the attacking 3rd, I think we'll all agree with that. So, when players of similar attacking abilities such as Totti & Del Piero have successfully and consistently played Supporting Striker/Attacking Midfield roles post 30 years of age, why do we not play Stevie there EVERY match provided we have a fit squad?

Perhaps Stoke away isn't the best match to return to after suffering a broken nose, but I really think we need to utilise Sahin. People seem to forget that he's still a Madrid player, and is still on the book's of one of the best teams in world football. Never seen much of him at Dortmund, but I really liked him when I seen him for Madrid last season. Don't buy this bullshit 'He can't cut the tempo and physicality of the Prem', been watching a lot of Bundesliga on ESPN past 18 months and it really isn't to dissimilar from the Prem at times. Needs to start taking one-touch and passing the ball quickly, build some confidence, and then start to express himself as a deep lying playmker even if he's off to sunny Madrid in May.

On another note, I've had this quote in my head all day (0.55)... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIqa11NCbmA

[BreakfastPercy]

I'm just not buying this argument that 3 at the back would have changed the outcome at Stoke.  Neither the second nor third goal was in any way emblamatic of a tactical defensive mistake.  Both of those goals came from set pieces (and yes, I consider a Stoke long-throw a set piece) where we had ample time to get our defense organized.  Both goals were simply the result of poor defending.  PERIOD.

Would 3 at the back have given us more space to play out of the back.  Maybe, but consider we already had 63% of possession and managed to get 17 shots away.  As usual, our inability to put shots on goal and in the net were evident, but im not sure how an extra defender would have helped with our shooting accuracy.

In theory every goal conceded is down to poor defending and PERIODs attract bears, neither change whether we picked the right team for the job. I worship at the temple of possession football, but I think we have a better chance of winning this particular game with Coates on the field. Previous games suggest so too.

Not just 3 at the back but Coates specifically gives us:
-Somebody who can either win the header that creates their first goal or an extra centreback to cover Skrtel's slip.
-Our biggest centreback to mark their biggest aerial threat (Jones) for their second goal (although admittedly that was mainly down to poor marking from Agger as much as size).
-It prevents a significant amount of tactical pressure every time they fling it towards Jones or Walters and get that knock-down (which I think harmed as as much as any single goal and contributed to a general intimidation of our team).
-We have an extra centreback in the box to either pick up Walters for their third goal, or have someone who can win the header challenging Jones for the flick on and stopping it from getting into the box.

Also worth noting I didn't criticize Rodgers for not playing Coates. Indeed, I listed a lot of reasons for not playing him, and of course losing in this way may benefit us in the long run through lessons learned. But even Rodgers mentioned 'earning the right to play' in his post-match interview, and everybody eventually realizes Stoke are a law unto themselves. Are we better for our players learning that, or our manager already knowing it?

[Twelfth Man]

Watch every goal we give up. There's room to drive a tractor through our defence. In fact centre forwards that are less mobile than a tractor are being made to look like world beater sprinters by our system. Watch Carlton Cole's performance the other week. He hasn't played like that in years. They are all having field days against us. Is that down to Agger and Skrtel? I don't think so. I think it's down to how they're being used.

we leave a great big hole in the defence with the split centrebacks, and against certain teams this becomes a major issue because the hole is in the space that they attack directly. There are two solutions to this – the first one is for the centrebacks to play more like a traditional central defence – approximately 10 yards apart at all times, sliding left and right as a unit to cover the strong side of the opposition’s attack. The other way to cope, which is my preference given the way BR wants to attack, is to play with three defenders, with two defensive mids in front of them. That gives you the flexibility to play with either 2 or 3 forwards (in a 3-5-2 or 3-4-3). We are so sensitive in that area of the field that teams don’t even have to do much in-depth scouting to figure out how to attack us. At half time, the average positions of Agger and Skrtel were practically in the fullback positions. This indicates that both Reina saw a lot of the ball in possession, and that Stoke were getting a lot of balls forward that were picked up by Reina. The final average positions showed that the gap had closed up some, but it was, as we shall see below, still wide open and available for penetration from the other team.

The same point being made, one in lay persons terms the other using coaching terminology. And thank you phaseofplay, your posts are an education. Rodgers is certainly aiming for the stars in terms of his playing style. Barcelona no less, perhaps the greatest side to ever play the game. It is good to aim high, the stars even as Shanks said. The problem is Rodgers seems to be contradicting his own words and the greatest coaching lesson he has learnt so far, the lesson of trying to change too much too quickly in the hope of getting us to the promised land. The issues eloquently expressed above are glaring and basic and reveal a naivete that Rodgers will have to address quickly. Is it all down to the personnel?  I don't think so, some of it feels structural to me.

When its good its wonderful, fast, fluid, relentless, a sheer joy to watch, yet the only teams we have managed this against have been the lesser teams that have failed to do the one thing everyone knows you do against Liverpool, press our midfield. I hope this is just teething troubles but the glaring nature of our basic vulnerability to quick counters straight down the middle of the defence suggests otherwise. Rodgers could have taken the route of a more piecemeal change/evolution instead he has changed it wholesale and obstinately decided to stick with his system despite not having the players to play it.


Idealism is great, the system Rodgers is trying to implement is one I personally love, but it should be something you craft slowly, rather than trying to force it on players who clearly cannot play it the way he wants. The idealism needs to be allied to some pragmatism. Limitations, Pulis knows his, Rodgers has yet to work his out. The bar is much higher with Rodgers that is obvious, but if he keeps on making such glaring mistakes, I fear he may never get a chance to reach it.

[StokieSteve]

Not sure if this is the right thread but here goes. After looking on Wiki, Brendan has (his Liverpool career) 31 games. 13 wins, 9 draws, 9 losses.

Roy Hodgson had exactly the same record which got him the sack. Now I'm not calling for him to be sacked, I'm just putting it out there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Rodgers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Hodgson

Certainly interesting.

[Big Red Richie]

Nothing personal mate, but do us a favour and leave that shit at the door.  Ta.


There's already enough blood letting and self flagillation going on for the time bing without throwing hand grenades in to the room for the smirking London centric press core to salivate over.   

[The 5th Benitle]

StokieSteve, you're not a red so you can be forgiven for not understanding the massive difference between the two. One was an abomination, the other deserves a chance.

[StokieSteve]

Ok lads, I'll leave it right there. No offence intended at all, it was simply an observation. Sorry.

[ElSheak]

You know it's a bad one when you wake up the next morning and the result creeps over you like an uncomfortable recollection of the nightmare you just had. 9:15am and I'm already angry.

There has been some scintillating analysis in this thread and I've no hope of matching it with depth of detail. But I'll add a few points, mainly to get them off my chest.

Mentality. It's just abysmal at times. If we're not looking completely shell shocked and making appalling decisions as a collective, then we're playing like a team who have already lost the game in their own minds before the effort fails to come forward. It's not just this season under Rodgers, but possibly dates back to Rafa's last season. We're fragile. Very, very fragile and last night we wandered about like a couple of fannies in the playground when the bigger boys turned up and wanted to play with our ball. It's poor and it was embarrassing. Have some fucking backbone and pride in the shirt. You're paid enough to at least pretend.

One thing I have noticed is that if we don't dictate the play, we're clueless to react to the opposition when they dictate it. This could be down to the above, or simply because we're too rigid in the only system we seem to have at our disposal.

We also seem to have slipped back towards not trusting each other again. Enrique doesn't seem to trust Suso ahead of him – this could be because of Suso's age and experience /physicality or ability to cover JE when they're too close to each other. Johnson doesn't seem to trust Downing ahead of him, Downing never seems to make the move that seems so obvious, i.e run in to the channel / space, instead stepping infield leaving Johnson stuck just over the half way line with a winger and full back ahead of him. Gerrard doesn't trust anyone. No one trusts Shelvey and, well, no-one outside of our club trusts Suarez. Basically when the going gets tough, we stop playing for each other and the team breaks down. Players play for themselves, taking on super hero roles, Suarez is guilty of this, Gerrard epitomises it.

Steven Gerrard. Legend. Fact. Legends are most of the time consigned to history, and unfortunately, this is where Gerrards better days are now. Once in a blue moon we'll see the likes of his Fulham goal. Sadly he's a shadow of the player he once was. We could always play Gerrard even when he was only on 30-40% of his game because you could rely on him to pop up with something special. Now his average game is consistently 30-40% of what it used to be, and those bits of magic have dried up almost to the point of non-existence. At what point do we accept that we're carrying him. At what point do we concede that his role in the first 11 is now more detrimental than an effective asset? 

He's no loner played on merit, but status, maybe even through contractual obligations (why else take 90% of all corners, when he's shit at them). His role as captain, icon and legend at the club, are so far all coming before his on field contributions. The notion of him as a captain who leads by example are no longer valid, his performances don't warrant such praise. Whether it's in the middle the 1 of a 2-1 or out on the right, I'm not sure he's got enough to keep delivering at this level much longer. His inclusion needs a rethink, his role within the team, as a player and a leader, need a rethink, both from himself and Rodgers. I always thought KK would be the man to manage his decline and retirement, possibly the only man big enough at the club in stature to do it. I'm convinced Rodgers hasn't got the balls to do it.

So what next? A system that suffers to accommodate a legend, or a legend that declines painfully before our eyes at the expense of the system. as Gerrard nears the end of his career, possibly the brightest of stars in a nebula of talent, do we consign him to history or persist at the expense of the future?

And for the record, he's the Liverpool player of my generation, I grew up in awe of the player.

What of his supposed replacement Shelvey. Someone posted a few pages back they feel there is something missing from his game. I think it's just a trait of youth, we can forget how young he is and sometimes he looks like he's just in that 'switched off' lid like phase of being a young lad. Like the kid who's in a body that's grown bigger than his age can actually handle. He'll come good, he just needs to grow up and wake up a bit.

But make no mistake he was wank at times last night. Apart from going three at the back, we needed more verve in the middle and I was certain that he'd come off, we'd push Gerrard behind Suarez and bring Hendersons tenacity into the middle to disrupt their play and win some second balls. The subbing of Lucas was at first met with concern over his fitness, but swiftly followed by confusion as the subbing made only a slight impact – it got marginally worse. Already frustrated with that the sight of Joe Cole coming on confirmed to me that Rodgers had conceded the game. Why else send Joe Cole on other than to give legs a run out. Waste. Of. Fucking. Time.

It was at that point that I've first questioned what BR is doing. I can't go deep in to the tactics, methodologies and patterns of play. I don't have enough footballing experience or coaching, but I do know that having a team, already beaten, mentally and physically, doesn't need to see the introduction of Joe Cole 'Wonder Enigma Extraordinaire'.

The whole team lost the plot last night, from the bench to the pitch, it unravelled like a cheap blag to your Ma when you were a kid as soon as you were pressed. Rodgers lost it, the players lost it and we lost it. Cheap and easy. I can accept losing, I can't execpt a soft display like that.

QPR worry me now. Taarabt will have a field day with our midfield, Gerrard won't get near him, Lucas will be the centre of a defending trio as the CBs are so widely split and if Shelvey plays (and BR persists with the 11 again) won't get near him either. He's like N'Zonzi from Wed night, Berbatov from the 2nd half against Fulham last Sat and any time we've played Dembele. We can't handle target men and we can't handle players like that either.

The say there are no easy games in this league. But for me the games are as easy or as hard as the manager, or players want to make them. RIght now we're making every game a hard game for Liverpool.

[bornandbRED]

Looking forward, we have some very tough games coming up. I just hope it doesn't end up in a scenario where our season capitulates vs the likes of City, Utd, Arsenal and a decent Norwich side in January. If it does, the shit will massively hit the fan, the knives will come out and we'll be back to square one.

[blert596]

The biggest criticism I'm laying on Brendans doorstep (and not SGs) is why he hasn't realised yet, when almost every other Liverpool fan I speak to has, that SG is having an adverse effect on the team playing where Brendans putting him.

You can knock Shelvey all you like, but he's being played in a position that he's not equiped to play. He doesnt have the quick feet, turn of pace, mobility, or the quick brain thats needed for that position.

Conversely Gerrard has all those attributes (and more), with Shelvey having the attributes to play in the role SG is now playing.

I find this as baffling and worrying as some of his other tactical and substitutional decisions.

[slimbo]

Some great insight in this thread.

I've said on a few threads I think our midfield personel are a major problem when it comes to our consistency.

Some thoughts on comments thus far:

1) Our midfield was ineffective against Stoke. Some have mentioned Joe Allen being played alongside Lucas to help in defensive midfield duties. I think this could work. Ultimately I would like to see us spend big on a dominant midfielder that carries a real presence in that area. Allen could then be cover for Lucas in terms of rotation or injury. I think Allen can play #6 but hasn't had the support from our other midfielders when he has played there.

2) Shelvey on the bench, Gerrard out of midfield. It's embarrassing watching players stroll around Gerrard. Shelvey is too erratic with his positional discipline. Is it any wonder our CB's are under pressure? I think Gerrard's only option is in a wide forward position or in a #10 role. Ideally I'd like to see Suso in at #10 with two strong players behind him. Lucas and another. Think he is tailor made for the role.

3) Some have mentioned 3 at the back. It probably is the option that should have been taken against Stoke and in reality it's not that different in philosophy from 4-3-3. Coates could have played centrally and handled the long balls and Agger and Skyrtl providing cover or marking their forwards. The midfield 3 play their same role and your wing backs cover the flanks and provide the width. Johnson and Enrique are more than capable of doing that. You could even argue giving Henderson or Stirling  a run there. The advantage you have is their CB's now have to forwards to contend with, something that would be more dangerous with say Suarez and Sturridge up front.

Because the central midfield roles remain the same you can change the system for example 4-3-3 first half to 3-5-2 second half if the other wasn't working. Confuses the hell out of the opposition defence as they now have to mark two central attackers and our #10 in the hole.

With the right players both systems can be effective and interchanged. Our midfield is a problem though in my view with some very tough decisions to be made.

[RotoruaRed]

We are in danger of making decisions and conclusions isolated around a single game, admittedly very poor game or couple of games when we take into account Villa.

Pulis has done a superb job or organising Stoke into a team very hard to beat and outplay. All done over a long peiod of time. Did he out-think Rodgers on boxing day?....yes. Will he continue to do so in the future?.... Well who knows. Below find a list of young players with approx ages (some may be sold of in future I admit)

Sterling 18
Suso 19
Wisdom 19
Allen 21
Coates 22
Shelvey 20
Kelly 22
Henderson 22
Sturridge 23
Ince 20
Borini 21

11 players average age is 20.6

I may be missing a few names but in some way all have contributed so far this season and sometimes not in an impressive way to our inconsistent season  (a few added who it looks like will contribute in the near future). These facts are self-evident. We can look short-term to gain the result on the night if that is possible. Rodgers could adjust his tactics and maybe get a result but it may be go against his own footballing principles.

But in the long term who is going to learn the most from the loss.

Merely stating that we should earn the right to battle on a cold night at Stoke does not mean that it will happen. You do have to earn & learn these lessons. This same result will probably happen again next year I have no doubt. However if we look long term and take the valuable lesson (and lessons to come) we will find in 2 years time that this young group will return  for this and other battles as hardened players not youngsters and in 5 years that same group of players will be so much the better for this sobering experience.

The risk of playing a lot of young is that they WILL let you down by being inconsistent.

The reward is that they are young enough to learn and return.

Get used to this inconsistency. it will be back on a regular basis because you can't trust young players to get it right. We can but support them and be assured they have a very good chance of getting it right but only in the long term.

I have not really discussed the match itself....Do i Need to?

[DanA]

I'm just not buying this argument that 3 at the back would have changed the outcome at Stoke.  Neither the second nor third goal was in any way emblamatic of a tactical defensive mistake.  Both of those goals came from set pieces (and yes, I consider a Stoke long-throw a set piece) where we had ample time to get our defense organized.  Both goals were simply the result of poor defending.  PERIOD.

Would 3 at the back have given us more space to play out of the back.  Maybe, but consider we already had 63% of possession and managed to get 17 shots away.  As usual, our inability to put shots on goal and in the net were evident, but im not sure how an extra defender would have helped with our shooting accuracy.

It's a combination of three at the back and the fact Coates is 6'8 that would have solved a lot of problems. It would have helped with all three goals too.

All three goals were created from won headers by k.Jones. Coates likely would have played on him (supported by Agger/Skrtel) and at 6'8 Coates doesn't lose a lot of aerial duels.

[Max_powers]

Many people have already pointed out that Coates would have helped us defensively. I would also like to add that In this game we really missed Allen. Now you might think that playing a 5'6" player in midfield against stoke we would have been overrun but Allen is our best player when it comes to playing the ball out from the back under pressure. Stoke were pressing very well and had we been more patient and we could have really opened up lot of space behind there midfield. I give you the example of Norwich another team that played extremely high pressing game against us but in that game we were very effective at moving the ball from the back to the front 3 through short passing that picked out players behind there midfield. Suarez was brilliant in that game but Allen and Sahin were really influential in breaking there pressing game.  Against Fulham we never needed a Player like Allen or Sahin because they never applied any pressure but against teams that press us high up the field we need one or both of them to be playing.

[woof]

We are in danger of making decisions and conclusions isolated around a single game, admittedly very poor game or couple of games when we take into account Villa.

Pulis has done a superb job or organising Stoke into a team very hard to beat and outplay. All done over a long peiod of time. Did he out-think Rodgers on boxing day?....yes. Will he continue to do so in the future?.... Well who knows. Below find a list of young players with approx ages (some may be sold of in future I admit)

Sterling 18
Suso 19
Wisdom 19
Allen 21
Coates 22
Shelvey 20
Kelly 22
Henderson 22
Sturridge 23
Ince 20
Borini 21

11 players average age is 20.6

I may be missing a few names but in some way all have contributed so far this season and sometimes not in an impressive way to our inconsistent season  (a few added who it looks like will contribute in the near future). These facts are self-evident. We can look short-term to gain the result on the night if that is possible. Rodgers could adjust his tactics and maybe get a result but it may be go against his own footballing principles.

But in the long term who is going to learn the most from the loss.

Merely stating that we should earn the right to battle on a cold night at Stoke does not mean that it will happen. You do have to earn & learn these lessons. This same result will probably happen again next year I have no doubt. However if we look long term and take the valuable lesson (and lessons to come) we will find in 2 years time that this young group will return  for this and other battles as hardened players not youngsters and in 5 years that same group of players will be so much the better for this sobering experience.

The risk of playing a lot of young is that they WILL let you down by being inconsistent.

The reward is that they are young enough to learn and return.

Get used to this inconsistency. it will be back on a regular basis because you can't trust young players to get it right. We can but support them and be assured they have a very good chance of getting it right but only in the long term.

I have not really discussed the match itself....Do i Need to?

Good post. People who want short term gain also have short memory - we lost to Stoke at Britannia and drew at home in the regular comp last season. The only time we beat them was in the League Cup. Are they our bogey team? I guess so. Why? Because they are more physical, press harder than us and we have not dealt with the long and high balls well, since Kenny's reign.

I do agree that sometimes we make comments on isolation, based on a single game. The same is said when we do win, like against pitiful Fulham. What the team needs to do is continue to fine tune BR's blueprint and show move conviction. Apart from Suarez, the rest just didn't have the conviction that we could win against Stoke.

To be constructive, I thought BR could have had Coates play as CB in the back 3. One more tall to deal with the high balls. Carra played there last season and was easily beaten. Agger is a fantastic CB but aerial duels is not his forte. That leaves Skrtel alone to deal with Stokes' strikers.

Shelvey has gone off the boil too after a promising start. Football is funny sometimes. We've seen Downing improved tremendously and now Shelvey is losing it. Perhaps some time on the bench to get his head right would be good for him. He's not quick minded like Suarez and playing him upfront will not reap dividends. In those precious milliseconds, a good striker relies on instinct and that's the difference between scoring a goal and wasting an opportunity

[Zlen]

We were obviously set up the wrong way and even looked unprepared in many ways. Stoke were superior as a team. Should have started with Coates, if not then switched to it at half time.
I can see what we're sacrifising and losing with stubborn persistence with a flimsy midfield and two advanced fullbacks leaving a continent of free space behind them, it's just sometimes hard to see what we're profiting from it - if anything at the moment.

Looking for a strong response from the team and the manager in our next match, let's at least stop being so bloody easy to beat.

[RedHopper]

aside from our usual problems with stoke, i'm more worried that when faced with a physical powerful and mobile striker, once again skrtel has wound up lying on his face, and agger has gone to pieces. It happened against Shane Long, It happened against benteke, and now it has happened against Jonathan Walters. I have a lot of time for Walters, but we made kenwyne jones look good, and he's really not very good at all. The way agger lost him for the corner was absolutely criminal.

Perhaps the time has come to drop one of our two centre halves, who at times seem to be playing like men who have just signed new long term contracts. Maybe if they felt that there was the slightest chance that the manager would drop them and pick coates, they might be a little bit more on their toes.   

[Clayton Bigsby]

^^^^
Lets not forget Carton Cole who looked the dog's against us as well

It is a worry to be honest. Somebody made the point that they dont get roughed up in training as we dont have big physical strikers

[RedHopper]

^^^^
Lets not forget Carton Cole who looked the dog's against us as well

It is a worry to be honest. Somebody made the point that they dont get roughed up in training as we dont have big physical strikers

heh, I knew there was another example. But we've never had big physical strikers. torres was very fast, but not exactly alan shearer in his elbowing gouging prime, and even andy carroll actually has the physical presence and menace of a small schoolgirl playing with her hello kitty doll.

[Twelfth Man]

^^^^
Lets not forget Carton Cole who looked the dog's against us as well

It is a worry to be honest. Somebody made the point that they dont get roughed up in training as we dont have big physical strikers

Have we stumbled upon a use for our Ł35m striker? Use him as a training aid for our CBs.

[Lazy Gun]

The EPLindex article is fantastic and highlights the extent to which the game was played the way Stoke wanted.

I keep seeing all the stats about possession, but rarely has our possession been truly effective in controlling the way the game is played.  Rafa always used to talk about how we controlled the game, usually in interviews after a game we had drawn.  Many carped about this, but it was true that the game had been played the way we dictated.

Teams are happy to concede tons of possession to us for our slow, laboured build up.  That's not controlling the game, that's being controlled.

The system isn't working and personally I can't see it working without a major clean out of players and a change in attitude from many.  In terms of progress this season, I suspect we are at the very bottom of most supporters range of expectations.  It's hard to be optimistic about our prospects in the short term.

[Groundskeeper Willie]

Top, top post. Sums up my thoughts exactly.

[Hank Scorpio]

No mate. Watch every goal we give up. There's room to drive a tractor through our defence. In fact centre forwards that are less mobile than a tractor are being made to look like world beater sprinters by our system. Watch Carlton Cole's performance the other week. He hasn't played like that in years. They are all having field days against us. Is that down to Agger and Skrtel? I don't think so. I think it's down to how they're being used.

I don't think this issue is totally down to the manager.  Skrtel and Agger are poor in the air when you put them in the Premier League context.  Carragher is better than both but age has caught up with him and he's lost a bit of that spring.  I've said it before but we've been going downhill since Hyypia left. 

For example, take the Stoke away from last season (I think, correct me if I'm wrong).  We concede a pen and lose 1-0.  If you look at the build up for that pen, you will see an almost identical phase of play to the one from Wednesday night where Stoke equalised.  High ball, Stoke striker wins the ball, it's then a scramble for the 2nd ball and we lose again, Stoke player into the penalty box and the only difference is Carragher brought down Walters last season, while Walters finshed well the other night.  That is consecutive defensive 'losses'.  If you can't win the high ball, then make damn sure you win the 2nd ball.  If you don't, that's death right there in this league.  Teams will gobble you up.  And that's what has happened. 

I do think that on this occasion, Rodgers got it badly wrong.  In fact, upon reflection, it's pretty damn naive.  If you can't win the high ball then set up to win the 2nd ball.  Get someone like Henderson to partner Lucas.  And then perhaps in the final 20 minutes go for it.  You won't really be blamed for that.  But to set up like that from the start was suicide. 

Overall though, I'm more convinced than ever that we need a centre half who will boom balls out of our half ala Hyypia.  That man used to get 40 yards on his headers.  You then push up.  Winning a header that falls a penny's throw away from you is about as useful as losing it. 

[Flaccido Dongingo]

Does anyone see parallels with Joe Allen and Jose Enrique last season?

Both started the season in amazing form, and both gradually got worse as the season progressed, I hope Joe has the mental strength to shake himself out of it.

[Butcher Knife Roberto]

I can see clearly why Coates would have been a good option at the back, but I can't help but think that either BR doesn't rate him or he's scared to drop either Skrtel or Agger in case they get the hump.

For me, the glaring solution to a game like this was sat on the bench; Carragher. Ok, he has zero pace but you don't need it against a team like Stoke, you need a battler. Along with Big Sami, Carra has been our best exponent of this for the better part of a decade, and you need this sort of experience in the PL or you're simply going to lose matches. Physical teams like Stoke must love playing against us, because they just set out to bully and outmuscle us, and as good as Agger and Skrtel are they sometimes look like boys against men. I'll hold my hands up and admit that I've probably unfairly criticised Carra in the past couple of season, but I can't help but think that with the colossal amount of experience he has we could do worse than to give him some playing time against teams like Stoke.

[spider-neil]

With regards to Gerrard, it's a shame Lucas was injured and Sahin has taken longer to settle then we would like because had all 3 been fit and firing it would have forced Rodgers into making a decision on gerrard.
Personally I still think our formation would be Lucas, Sahin and Allen (a midfield 3 to control the midfield with possession) and a front 3 of Suarez, Sturridge and Gerrard (the biggest goal threats).
Gerrard is (or was) a world class talent but imho he isn't contributing enough in an attacking or defensive sense and also when you have midfielders that don't press the opposition high up the pitch any attempt at possession football is going to be difficult.

[Zlen]

Does anyone see parallels with Joe Allen and Jose Enrique last season?

Both started the season in amazing form, and both gradually got worse as the season progressed, I hope Joe has the mental strength to shake himself out of it.

I think he was simpy overworked.
Expecting him to shine again against QPR.

[PanchDeBurca]

Seems like there is a lot of handwringing at the moment over our defensive inconsistancies.  There is some great tactical analysis in this thread and I dont have anything to add, except a question.

Can you honestly say that any of our three goals yesterday were solely down to poor tactics?  Maybe if we were playing with three at the back, we would have had an extra cover for Skrtel when he slipped, but still, if he doesnt slip, that may not be a goal at all.

As for the second goal.  We could have had 5 CBs on the pitch, but if you let a player run unmarked to the near post on a corner, well you get what you deserve.

The third goal was from a throw in and we had plenty of time to set our defense.  Just poor effort by Skrtel.

I just don't see Coates as being an answer.  He has looked shaky to me when he plays.  He gives away too many fouls in bad situations.  His positional awareness is awful.  We have a real problem at CB right now as we only have two players who are playing anywhere near league standards.  As long as Rodgers refuses to play Flannagan or Robinson, we have no depth at any of the back four.  I just don't know if Rodgers feels like he has a team that can play 3 at the back.

I have to say i think this is the best post in the thread - not the deepest tactical analysis but for me it sums up what went wrong at Stoke

The 3 goals yesterday were completely NOT down to bad tactics but entirely down to bad defending and mistakes by defenders - this for me had nothing to do with the tactics.  Skrtel slipped for the first - it happens and was unfortunate - especially as it allowed Stoke back into the game so fast after we scored.  Should Johnson have been tucked in closer?  Possibly but that is being very critical

The second goal was shambolic defending from Agger - he allowed Jones to run around the front of the keeper and the group of players while he ran around the back.  This meant he was about 5 yards away from the man he was marking who then had a free header. A corner away at Stoke and you do this?? 

The third goal was terrible - I'm not sure who was worse - Skretl for allowing Jones to win the ball unchallenged or Agger for being a few yards off Walters when it was obvious the throw in was being hurled into the box.

Agger and Skretl really need to up their performance level - particularly Agger for me - who has shown some shocking naivety at times this season - he's like he just isn't concentrating.  There are several instances i.e. goals which are directly attributable to Agger letting the man run past him/away from him far to easy.  It seems to me that he is always on the back foot, trying to react instead of anticipate.  That's not like him and he is better than the performances he is giving us so far this season.

I am also unconvinced by Coates - or to put it correctly i am not sure that playing 3 at the back would cure the problems that we suffered.  I don't think we needed to add players to the defense - just those that were there doing their jobs properly

In other areas of the pitch Shelvey was woeful - and has been for a while now.  He needs a spell on the bench.  I have never seen what other see in him but he is young so he will need time.  But i have never been convinced by him.

Suarez was fantastic - he needed a good game as he was poor at Fulham - as as usual with Suarez he delivered.  He was limping at the end so hope all is well with him.

Gerrard needs to be further up the pitch - he has never been a central midfielder in my opinion and now that he isn't as mobile as before i am even more convinced of it.  But he is always liable to play a defense splitting pass or have a fantastic shot or whatever moment of brilliance - we need to exploit that - especially as our attack is lacking in some of his strongest attributes

Personally i'd like to see Shelvey benched, Gerrard further forward and Henderson's energy and dynamism in Gerrard's position - especially away from home

Looking forward to seeing what Sturridge brings to the party - I actually think he could do very well for us.  He has pace and a willingness to get into the box which we are lacking so he could work out ok for us

[Fordy]

With regards to Gerrard, it's a shame Lucas was injured and Sahin has taken longer to settle then we would like because had all 3 been fit and firing it would have forced Rodgers into making a decision on gerrard.
Personally I still think our formation would be Lucas, Sahin and Allen (a midfield 3 to control the midfield with possession) and a front 3 of Suarez, Sturridge and Gerrard (the biggest goal threats).
Gerrard is (or was) a world class talent but imho he isn't contributing enough in an attacking or defensive sense and also when you have midfielders that don't press the opposition high up the pitch any attempt at possession football is going to be difficult.

Gerrard is by no way the problem. It's like we're using him as the excuse on here. The problem is the 'philosophy'.

Against Stoke Wisdom and Coates should of come into considersation. For me Coates was a must for this match. 4-3-3 wasn't the way to go against Stoke and certainly not if your're not to include Wisdom or Coates at the back.

Gerrard starts no matter what the problem we've is 4-3-3 really the best fomation for us. 5-3-2 or 4-4-1-1 might of be better.

[John C]

I never really got why people say that. What is wrong about knowing where the opposition's strengths and weaknesses are? If you want to win games, you'll probably have to take advantage of the weaknesses and stop them from using their strengths.

Exactly mate. I'm a local government officer so I don't spend all week preparing for Saturday. With a massive slice of Christmas hindsight it can be argued that we lost a bit of our already weak attacking prowess by putting Enrique at LB for the sake of a bit of muscle when the options were 3 at the back, Agger at LB or Johnson at LB with Wisdom at RB. Its great for me to be able to do it Suarez missed the support he was enjoying from Enrique, Downing actually stayed narrow and Stoke's bank of 15 monsters found it so easy to keep us out.

[Crosby Nick]

and Stoke's bank of 15 monsters found it so easy to keep us out.

Failing to trouble Stoke too much was as much down to us as them. They may have only been half chances but Shelvey being played in in the first half and failing to control, the one Suraez put across the face of goal, a couple of Downing's pull backs were all chances that other teams/players might have put away and suddenly we'd be saying it's a clinical performance. Whether that's down to players/tactics/something else is a debate I don't want to have again though and I don't know what the miracle cure is!

I realize this is a long standing issue, and hardly a one off but I dodn't think we were 'that' blunt. We lost our shape in the last half hour but for long spells I thought we played alright but failed to make the most of our opportunities.

[kkjellquist]

I'm just not buying this argument that 3 at the back would have changed the outcome at Stoke.  Neither the second nor third goal was in any way emblamatic of a tactical defensive mistake. 

I think having Coates stick to Jones like glue would have made a big difference.

[PanchDeBurca]

I think having Coates stick to Jones like glue would have made a big difference.

but Agger should have been sticking to him like glue at the corner but he left him run away from him but going around the back while jones went around the front

There is a difference between individual mistakes (or even team mistakes) and tactical mistakes - I don't necessarily think it was wrong to play only 2 CB's

[n00bert]

How on earth are Agger and Skrtel supposed to learn how to defend against big, strong, powerful strikers during games, if they never get the opportunity to train against them? It's even worse if they're mobile too - look how good we made Carlton Cole look recently.

The answer is that they essentially have to learn how to handle these types of players during the game - but when those players are effective as well as physical, it's often a very dangerous game. By the time our defence had figured out how to play against Stoke, Stoke had scored three times. One was from a long ball, one from a corner, and one from a long throw. It was actually a bit embarrassing to watch - after all, it's not like it was an unexpected approach from Stoke's point of view, was it?

Yes, most of us are quite familiar with the Stoke playbook. Never pretty but extremely effective and they are so very difficult to beat at the Britannia.

How to deal with big and strong centre-forwards then? Well, I think it's equally a matter of adjusting your tactics to deal with these players as it is individuals learning their matchups. Jones played superbly and the quality of his performance was highlighted even more after Crouch came on and was unable to replicate his strength, touch and positioning.  It was the same with Carlton Cole.

What would I do differently? It was clear to me at the start that this one game where pressing from the front would be ineffective because it literally played into Stoke hands. I am a believer that the point of pressing from the front is two-fold - first, to win the ball higher up the field and second, to make the other team play the ball long and hence a low-percentage pass.

Stoke, as one dimensional as they are, are looking for the long-ball from deep so it negates both benefits of pressing the ball high up the field.

Therefore, the most important thing to do is look at winning the second ball. Once we win the ball, we can revert to our philosophy of playing the ball out from the back. Unfortunately, it seems that we didn't do that or at least didn't do it well enough.

So, my question here is "Will Daniel Sturridge help us improve in both boxes?"

Is he good enough to  not only bag goals when we play at the weekend, but to sufficiently challenge Agger and Skrtel enough during training to help them learn how to deal with big units?

I think going forward yes, not sure how much value he will have as defender's practice. He is a different type of player to the likes of Cole and Jones.

My second question is this: "With Jonjo Shelvey and Nuri Sahin unwilling to do the dirty work in midfield, Joe Allen too lightweight and suspect during transitions, and Steven Gerrard both too lazy and positionally slack to bother filling in gaps when we lose the ball, how can we close up the gap in front of the two centre backs and become more effective at winning second balls?"

Is Jordan Henderson good enough defensively to sit in alongside Lucas and use his dynamism to press the ball? Or, do we need to buy a physical specimen to play in that destructor role alongside Lucas? Should we be looking to have a dual-protector partnership in the middle a la Mikel - Ramires / sometimes play, especially as we're encouraging both full-backs to attack? How do we fill this massive gap?

That was what I was getting at. Do we have the personel? I believe we do. I would even have played Shelvey further back and Gerrard in the no.10 role to accomodate Stevie's lack of defensive discipline. Could we do with a Mikel/Ramirez type of player? I'd say that it wouldn't hurt but I think that anybody from Henderson/Shelvey/Allen/Sahin could quite easily play beside Lucas in the second holding role.

The problem against Stoke was trusting Gerrard to play that second defensive role. The problem with that problem is that he has shown that he is still capable of playing the role and playing it well (and probably better than any of the others mentioned above) when he feels like he wants to do it. So that is one of the conundrums with Gerrard.

My third question is a classic - "What do we need to do with Steven Gerrard?"

He's got all the class and ability in the world, but his legs have gone. We can't play him how United play Scholes, because he doesn't have the discipline and our fowards don't retain possession well enough. He can't play as a central midfielder next to Lucas - he's NEVER been able to play that role.

I won't say that he's never been able to play that role. I think when he was younger, maybe less prone to injury and he was my dynamic he would relish being that box to box midfielder and enjoy tackling as much as he enjoyed scoring and breaking open defences.

So what do we do with him? I agree, push him further forward. I'd like to see him play behind Suarez because I think that's where we will get the best out of him. I don't mind him on the right like you suggested, but at the same time I think his influence could be tempered from a wider position so much better to have him relatively free roaming in the no. 10 role. 

What Gerrard does have is an instinct to get into the box - something which I think Henderson, Allen and to a lesser degree Shelvey lacks. Gerrard likes scoring goals, always has and as a result he likes to get into those goalscoring positions. He would be most influential making late runs and filling the gap when Suarez vacates to go left/right. 

My final, two-fold question is regarding Brendan Rodgers - "What mistakes are we making regularly, and is there evidence that Rodgers and his team are noticing and working on fixing them? Also, is Rodgers' philosophy hindering our short-term progress by trying to implement style over pragmatism at any cost?"

Well, that's a tough one. The only 'real' mistake I think we are making is against teams that play like Stoke and rely on a big CF to hold on to possession in the final third - saw it also against Everton and West Ham. I'm waiting to see how he responds but I'm sure the answer lies in finding a defensive partner for Lucas in the midfield as I think we both agree that Gerrard is probably not the answer.

The other question - I think it's important that he recognize that there are teams we play against where full-field pressing is going to be ineffective. I read in the post-match thread that people were asking why we were not pressing Stoke in their half but really, what good would that do? It would be token pressure against a team that is looking for the long ball. And in many ways, it's NEVER going to work against teams like Stoke unless Stoke themselves change the way they play.

So while I think it's important that we stick to the principles of our football - ie. resting on the ball, playing it out the back - there is also an equal imperative for us to be able to be fluid defensively and be able to adjust how we win the ball back rather than just running up against a back four that is keen on just booting it long.

[Hank Scorpio]

The point about Agger/Skrtel learning how to mark a big striker.  We had Carroll for 18 months.  He's probably the ultimate big front man.  It's not as if they've never had that daily experience.  And we effectively chose to let him go on loan this season.