Topic: Arsenal 2-2 Liverpool - Round Table

[Eeyore]

Disagree.

That's the attitude of a team that wants to 'compete' with the best.

Brendan wants us to impose our style so other teams have to combat what we do rather than the other way around.

To be honest mate for the last three away games we haven't even tried to impose our game. Against Arsenal, Oldham and United they have completely dictated how the game has been played. We might be able to impose our game at home against poor teams but we certainly cannot do it against the better sides or even sides that refuse us to play.

[b_joseph]

To be honest mate for the last three away games we haven't even tried to impose our game. Against Arsenal, Oldham and United they have completely dictated how the game has been played. We might be able to impose our game at home against poor teams but we certainly cannot do it against the better sides or even sides that refuse us to play.

Wanting to do it and being able to do it are separate things. Thats why we are developing, we are trying to get to the stage where we can do that but along the way, there will be obvious bumps in the road.

The issue though is that folks will get on his back for not being pragmatic if we go out there and throw caution to the wind by going for our style 100%.
He is trying to find a balance between allowing us to improve and have growing pains. But also picking up enough points so he doesnt get trashed. Hard balance.

[L666KOP]

Wanting to do it and being able to do it are separate things. Thats why we are developing, we are trying to get to the stage where we can do that but along the way, there will be obvious bumps in the road.

The issue though is that folks will get on his back for not being pragmatic if we go out there and throw caution to the wind by going for our style 100%.
He is trying to find a balance between allowing us to improve and have growing pains. But also picking up enough points so he doesnt get trashed. Hard balance.

Correct.
I think most would agree that we've been able to turn our league form around. Personally I'd like us to try and impose our passing game against City, if we lose, so fucking what, it will let Brendan know how far we've come this season. I don't think anyone expects a win, and 99% would take a draw right now. If we don't try and impose our game we'll never be able to do it, I wanted a more pragmatic approach early in the season, but I was wrong, the team have shown they can do what Brendan wants against the lesser lights and credit where it's due we seem to be able to put the majority of the sides below us to the sword, a problem that's haunted us for years. I want Brendan to do all his 'practicing' this season, the league is won by beating the teams below you, because if you've title aspirations there'll be more of them under, than above you.
Let's have a go, Brendan should tell them to just go out, no pressure, and see how we do, if it goes tits up he can swap it around a bit if it looks like we may get a spanking. But let's not come so far, and then duck out against the so called better teams, we knew it would be a roller coaster season. Let them worry about us.

[redtel]

There are many varying opinions on the game in here which makes the grey matter churn around. Great stuff.

Have we ever had 3 games in succession like our last 3? On track to be passing 'em to death after the 5-0 destruction of Norwich who are a passing team themselves. Then we are all going to hell on a handcart with the kids sat behind the driver after a shocker at Oldham. Finally an away draw against a good side which has brought all manner of praise and criticism.

Even our goalscorers Hendo and Luis have found praise and criticism on the same page and I can see both sides of the arguement. We dropped back too far after half time but nobody is sure it was due to the inclusion of Carra. I think Rodgers was faced with a dilemma in selection after Skrtel's poor display. We needed to avoid defeat as we would then be 6pts off our rivals and although Carra is not the future he could hopefully help secure the back door if we were set up to that end.

We did well in the first 45 and pressed well for the first 15 or 20 mins I thought. Nobody was calling for Skrtel to come back in at that point, and to me it looked as if the team were told to hang on to what we had at the start of the second half. This was surprising as this was Arsenal's 8th game in January due to an FAC replay and a rearranged league game v West Ham.

If we had of stretched the game they would have felt it more than us on that big pitch. As it was Wilshere and Ramsey were picking clearances up in our half and had to run only short distances to create problems around our penalty area. There interplay was fast but could they have kept it up if they had to build play up from their own half.

My biggest disappointment was our failure to target Andre Santos who had been poor at Brighton in the FAC which was his first game since he was roasted at O.T. by Valencia I think. Just imagine if we could have had Luis running at him instead of Downing. I can't remember him going past the substitute left back once and  Arsenal have just signed a LB to plug a gaping hole left by Gibbs injury. It was a gilt edged chance and a winger we paid £20mill for wasn't up to it.

I half expect Carra to start on Sunday but it can only be a short term thing if we want to push on and play higher up the pitch in order to win games and close the gap to 6th place. Enrique should be starting again and we look to have as near to a fit full squad for quite a long time plus the two new signings.

I said the last 3 games were a mixture but the 3 after City will be a test for Rodgers in selection. Home against West Brom,a trip to Russia, then home to Swansea all in 6 days. We want 4th place in the league but have to do well in the EL surely.

[Hank Scorpio]

Well the justification would be winning games wouldn't it? Trying to climb the table and all that type of stuff? Clearly perfecting a style for 2015 using players that probably wont be here is the primary goal but ye know BR he's a whacky type of guy..........

Part of building a side is building belief - its difficult to do when you lose every week

Part of building a side is teaching them how to play, again difficult if nobody opens their trap.....

I hope BR believes that we can get 4th - to do so we need to play now not in 2015 - our squad limitations have costs us a points - we should be in the top 4 already, we would be if we'd had Sturridge from the off - sure plenty of teams can claim if we had this player or that but we were criminally understrength up front even before Carroll left, Borini's injury made it worse

Carragher is capable of doing a role now, Skrtel should be better but for some reason his form or confidence has deserted him - how long Carra can do it for even this season who knows part of his advantage this season is he has been rested and so he isn't that fraction of yard slower, he is getting his tackles and blocks in rather than missing by an inch - BR's game plan does not necessitate two good ball playing CB's (it would help but it isn't crucial) so he can 'do a job' and more importantly at the moment he offers something extra - passion or determination or organisation I dont know what but something otherwise he wouldn't be playing - BR showed early doors that he wouldn't simply pick him on 'status'. If Carra had gone under the ball on Wednesday as Agger did he'd have been shredded and written off by our fans (again) - its a fine line the lad is walking. Skrtel should be stepping up but with talk of Williams maybe he knows something we dont?

You make an important point about team building and how winning can facilitate.

But will Carragher really help us win games now?  Especially considering the system and style Rodgers wants.  I'm not sure.  I'd say we will still have the same problems as we would see if Skrtel started.  I actually believe there is not a big gap between Carragher and Skrtel right now.  That's both a compliment to Carragher and a criticism of Skrtel.  Skrtel should not be displaced by a 35 year old veteran, no matter who he is. 

I have to be honest Vulmea, I'm not buying the argument that we will have a better chance of winning games with Carragher in the side.  But then again, we've had 2 games so far with him in the side, one a 5-0 thumping and the other a draw where we were totally outplayed sitting deeper and deeper as the game progressed.

[Hank Scorpio]

I see some praise for Arsenal in this thread.  They deserve praise for their style but that has been a constant for years now.  They are a poor version of previous sides.  We really should not have been outplayed by them over 180 minutes (Anfield and the other night).  While people may be of the opinion that they forced us back, I thought the pressure was of our own making.

I said it before but it is no wonder that we haven't beaten sides in the top half of the table.  We concede space and when you do that against top teams they will hurt you.  Still it's been a mixed bag against the top sides.  United 1-2 (h) & 2-1 (a) where I thought we bossed them at Anfield but were dominated in the 1st half at OT only to come back.  City 2-2 (h) where we played well.  Arsenal 0-2 (h) & 2-2 (a) where we were outplayed in both games.  Spurs 2-1 (a) I have not seen but appears to be similar to the United away match.  Chelsea 1-1 (a) another backs to the wall match but with a little more control.

[helmboy_nige]

How nice was it to see Carragher playing so well after so long out of the team? He was tidy in possession too.

It was great to see him in the side and he didn't put a foot wrong.  Legend through and through.  I hate starting sentences with 'but'. But, there's a definite argument that one of the reasons we sat so deep is because Carragher doesn't have the pace to sit higher up the pitch.  When we were up against it, we couldn't regain any control.  Now, that's not aimed at having a go at Carragher.  He's a great man and player, but we have to accept were he is in his career.  What are our options if we want someone other than Skrtel/Agger in the team?  Seems we don't have any other than Carragher with Coates not exactly setting the league alight.

In isolation, it was lovely to see him back in and playing so well.  It's just not a long term solution and if anything demonstrates our lack of cover.

Wisdom looked a little lost tonight. Is the return of Enrique timely, or would you persevere with the young man?

He did, but he is young and being asked to do a lot.  I definitely want to see Enrique back in as the more pressure we put on the likes of Wisdom, the more harm it will do to their careers if they have a rough spell.

The midfield three were bogged down for a lot of the game, is Lucas showing signs of getting back to his best or is he still looking rusty?

Lucas I thought did a great job first half, but maybe the issue was that we tired in the second.  We dominated for the opening 45 mins and could have scored more than one.  Lucas, Gerrard and Henderson is clearly our strongest midfield, but we can't rely on the centre.  We were getting killed down the wings and as much as I love Johnson, he is not a left-back.

Henderson scored a wonderful goal tonight and chased his heart out, however I feel as though he is lacking that little bit of composure and quality. Am I being harsh on him, and if not, can the composure be taught over time?

A bit harsh, but I guess true.  Look at it this way though.  Last season people were having a go at Suarez because his composure in front of goal was woeful.  Now of course Henderson isn't in the same league as Suarez (few players in the world are), but people were saying then that you can't teach Suarez to be better in front of goal.  Those people are quiet this season.  Henderson was simply awesome.  Seeing him make that quick turn to attack the box for his goal summed up everything about the lads determination to prove the doubters wrong.

Suarez played very deep for most of the game and played well (one of the passes of the season first half) - was Rodgers right to play him from the left, or would you have liked to see him more advanced and central?

Thought it was a good moved and worked for a good period of the game, but as we got into the second half Suarez seemed to struggle to have much influence.  that may be because we resorted to pumping it upfield just to get it away from the area.  I'd like to see him more behind Sturridge than pushed out wide.  Perhaps when Enrique is back it will be easier to do this.

How concerning is our inability to close out a game, and how can it be solved?

Team needs either a bit of luck or Dr Peters needs to get his magic wand out because it does feel very very psychological.  Arsenal away is not a great sample of our inability in this area because to be fair to them they were all over us in the early part of the second half.

Overall we are improving and that's there for all to see.  It will take time to sort out the defensive problems (particularly from set pieces) and the mental problems, but at least we actually look like a team that can and will score now!

[Vulmea]

But will Carragher really help us win games now?  Skrtel should not be displaced by a 35 year old veteran, no matter who he is. 

I think its the difference between the team on paper and the one on the pitch. Skrtel is bigger, stronger, quicker, technically better with the ball, superior in the air........but where was that player against Oldham - he didn't turn up til we were 3- 1 down. Its the bit between the ears, the bit we can't see thats crucial.

I'm not sure Skrtel has done that much wrong this year and his own game maybe sound but with a young kid outside him is he the best communicator and organiser - with a new system being trialled infront of him is he helping everybody else as he needs to? Roy thinks Wisdom suffered with Carra next to him - that threw me a bit because I thought the lads poorest performances have come with Skrtel. I thought it was our position on the field which created the pressure  and our lack of a midfield that caused the aimless hacking to nowhere.

I don't think there's much doubt on paper Agger and Skrtel should be our preferred CB pairing - it fits BR's model of an aerially dominant player and a ball player but the reality seems to be slightly different. I've been shouted down before for suggesting neither is a natural leader , communicator or organiser because they are both excellent centrebacks, they may even have captained their countries, but they dont strike me as vocal - now if you have a well drilled system maybe that communication isn't as important ( i dont believe it for  a second but maybe) but when bedding in a system , with players out of their comfort zone, when you have youngsters learning their trade surely communications and leadership are incredibly important, you can't just look after yourself in that environment.

Its probably the mid 90's since we had a better attack than defence.......

[steveeastend]

I think its the difference between the team on paper and the one on the pitch. Skrtel is bigger, stronger, quicker, technically better with the ball, superior in the air........but where was that player against Oldham - he didn't turn up til we were 3- 1 down. Its the bit between the ears, the bit we can't see thats crucial.

The thing is though that he didn´t do anything wrong against the Mancs, in contrast I thougt he was very good. To see himself put back in second line was probably a surprise to him.

According to this logic Srktel is a big game player. A good reason to play him against Arsenal.

[JackWard33]

I was wondering - in all seriousness - who people thought played badly on Wednesday?

There were positives to our performance but I think it's tough to argue we weren't second best for the majority of the game
In the various player threads I've seen almost every single player generally praised for having a good game
So either that's not true, or we did our best but aren't good enough or we were actually the better team and I'm wrong about the game??

Personally I think for all the discussions about our goal scoring and our defense that our problems actually lie midfield especially against the better teams (like Arsenal)
We just didn't have control of the game in the middle at all last night. We seem worryingly disorganized without the ball (when teams counter attack its really keystone cops time) and it seems far too easy for good central midfielders to dominate us in the middle

[Not funny reecehenebry]

I'm not making excuses, and resent the accusation. I'm merely pointing out that people are only discussing where we might have gone wrong without considering the fact that Arsenal stepped up a gear and were very good. I also think you have a huge agenda against our current manager which colours your analysis. The reason for your agenda might just be the fifth word in your post

Mine was a general point lad.

I had no agenda. I have always been clear. We don't have the setup to allow a young manager to succeed. Also mentioning Rafa isn't a crime. He was the most successful manager in our recent history, one who made a habit of overturning teams better equipped than our own. Which was part of my point. The idea that we cannot beat those better equipped than us, that its alright is bullshit. Aim for the ceiling.......

[Anywhichwayicant]

Last couple of sentences of your post are bang on the button, Reece. This mentality of `ah well, thats to be expected` is disappointing to see.

[Filler.]

I was wondering - in all seriousness - who people thought played badly on Wednesday?

For me, I thought the game was a bit disheartening. Not disappointing, but disheartening. There's a subtle difference there for me. We're often a bit disappointed after a result - but I was actually a tad disheartened.

I don't think Wednesday's game asks for any indepth assessment on individuals. It's the collective thing that's got to me. We don't have an identity in midfield. And it's in midfield where we are coming woefully short. At Oldham, we bizarrely went 424 and paid for it. At Arsenal, the defense started to bypass the midfield, and frankly, who could blame them? It's been a while since I've seen us do that. At Oldham it said Dietmar Hamann... the other day it said Alonso.

It doesn't help that Lucas is seemingly playing as if he's on Valium at the mo. Bit odd considering he had a good rest... was he his normal self in training and simply didn't show up or has he been struggling a bit with his return from injury? That's the only 'personnel' query I have. I hope and pray he will be fine, eventually, but this could take a little while maybe. That's a worry.


But, I'd have taken a point beforehand... but we didn't get them back into position and looking around, and guarding and watching, while we passed, passed, moved, waited... all that stuff - at all. Not once I don't think. We burgled a few goals and up front, we've got a smile on our face there... but the midfield - that's the weakness. And Henderson did well too - delighted he got his goal as I spent so long screaming for him to get on that bloody ball and go for it.

As for them... Cazorla, Ramsey and particularly Wilshere... especially Wilshere. He's good. He's very good. Runners from the 2 in a 4231 - that's what you need - and that's him all over.

We'll have City tho.

[Timbo's Goals]

For me, I thought the game was a bit disheartening. Not disappointing, but disheartening. There's a subtle difference there for me. We're often a bit disappointed after a result - but I was actually a tad disheartened.

I don't think Wednesday's game asks for any indepth assessment on individuals. It's the collective thing that's got to me. We don't have an identity in midfield. And it's in midfield where we are coming woefully short. At Oldham, we bizarrely went 424 and paid for it. At Arsenal, the defense started to bypass the midfield, and frankly, who could blame them? It's been a while since I've seen us do that. At Oldham it said Dietmar Hamann... the other day it said Alonso.

It doesn't help that Lucas is seemingly playing as if he's on Valium at the mo. Bit odd considering he had a good rest... was he his normal self in training and simply didn't show up or has he been struggling a bit with his return from injury? That's the only 'personnel' query I have. I hope and pray he will be fine, eventually, but this could take a little while maybe. That's a worry.


But, I'd have taken a point beforehand... but we didn't get them back into position and looking around, and guarding and watching, while we passed, passed, moved, waited... all that stuff - at all. Not once I don't think. We burgled a few goals and up front, we've got a smile on our face there... but the midfield - that's the weakness. And Henderson did well too - delighted he got his goal as I spent so long screaming for him to get on that bloody ball and go for it.

As for them... Cazorla, Ramsey and particularly Wilshere... especially Wilshere. He's good. He's very good. Runners from the 2 in a 4231 - that's what you need - and that's him all over.

We'll have City tho.

Great post F. And I also think we have a far better chance of imposing ourselves against City.

The only rider I'd add to it is that despite us being second best in midfield for the entire game we did hang on in there. Which when you're being given a bit of a run around takes a fair bit of spirit. So on that score none of the three deserve criticism for me as against the odds of far better players and an infinitely better midfield unit they clearly still all gave of their best. Henderson particularly but all three were at the fullest tilt they could each manage to summon up merely to offer resistance. As you say Lucas is some way short of what he was. Whether that sharpness and anticipation and presence will return we'll have to wait and see.

Finally I won't keep harping on about Wilshere except to say 'very good' for me doesn't tell half the story of this lad's ability.

[richmiller1]

I was wondering - in all seriousness - who people thought played badly on Wednesday?

There were positives to our performance but I think it's tough to argue we weren't second best for the majority of the game
In the various player threads I've seen almost every single player generally praised for having a good game
So either that's not true, or we did our best but aren't good enough or we were actually the better team and I'm wrong about the game??

Personally I think for all the discussions about our goal scoring and our defense that our problems actually lie midfield especially against the better teams (like Arsenal)
We just didn't have control of the game in the middle at all last night. We seem worryingly disorganized without the ball (when teams counter attack its really keystone cops time) and it seems far too easy for good central midfielders to dominate us in the middle

Nobody was attrotious, plenty were fairly ordinary mind and some dropped a bit below that as their legs lost a little spring in the second half. Sturridge, Lucas and Downing were probably the ones you could reasonably expect better from but Sturridge looked totally shot early in the second half,two games in quick succession was clearly a step too far and Lucus declined noticably in the second half too so stamina was clearly a key factor. Agger probably also has a case to answer for that first goal

I have to disagree about the first half as I thought were well in control of that. Yes they had more possession but it was possession mainly of our choosing and they never really looked much like hurting us. We probably should have gone in two goals up. As I said above, there was something of Houllier in that first half, we kept our shape exceptionally well and had a bit of bite on the counter. Whenever we wanted to win the ball back it looked like we were well able to do so. The pressing was quick but measured and Henderson Lucas and Gerrard were picking the pockets of their Arsenal counterparts with regular ease. Then when we did win it back we held on to the ball well long enough to give the Arsenal backline something to worry about.

Stamina and confidence were largely what did for us in the second half. Sturridge ceased being an out ball, Lucas was reaching both man and ball a fraction of a second slower than he had been. We conceded,the defence dropped another eight or nine yards and Lucas and Gerrard even further. We essentially ceded teritorial control to Arsenal, weren't winning it back anymore and when it did land at our feet we held it for about three passes before giving it back to Wilshere.

A fitter Lucas and Sturridge combined with us not being a complete liability everytime we face a cross then I suspect that second half may have played out rather differently.

I'm reserving judgement on the midfield as a unit until the end of the season.

[DanA]

I don;t think you can blame the midfield, I think we played that style not because of them but because we didn't have confidence in our defense pushing up against the quick Arsenal attackers. So rather than press we had our forwards drop back. Once that happens it's very hard to get our midfield to boss the game from such a passive position. Henderson was fantastic, we know Gerrard is class and Lucas is getting back to where he was. Not too many better midfielders than what we put out.

[Not funny reecehenebry]

Lucas plays better with a presser alongside. For me Gerrard played way to deep against these lot. On fact he played in Lucas's position in the second half, leaving Lucas to press the ball early rather than cover the midfield reading the game. Hence Lucas being bypassed. Strange.

[murdell]

Arsenals midfield is far superior to ours when it comes to dynamism, creativity and intelligence with and without the ball. The central 3 I mean. Our tactics were spot on. Pressing Arsenal high at home is naive in the extreme. We might act billy big bollox at home to cannon fodder but at the moment we can't do what Arsenal done to us for the majority of this game against real quality.

For me our midfield three remains a problem going forward. Its not capable of running a controlled game high up the pitch. I've come to the conclusion that Rodgers has no interest on doing so either and that is my first big disappointment of his reign.I'm not saying he won't get success doing what he is doing but I was expecting something more.

[cricketrocks]

Arsenals midfield is far superior to ours when it comes to dynamism, creativity and intelligence with and without the ball. The central 3 I mean. Our tactics were spot on. Pressing Arsenal high at home is naive in the extreme. We might act billy big bollox at home to cannon fodder but at the moment we can't do what Arsenal done to us for the majority of this game against real quality.

For me our midfield three remains a problem going forward. Its not capable of running a controlled game high up the pitch. I've come to the conclusion that Rodgers has no interest on doing so either and that is my first big disappointment of his reign.I'm not saying he won't get success doing what he is doing but I was expecting something more.

And you'd crucify him if he stuck to his preferred formation and style, with us being outplayed and perhaps heavily outscored, accusing him of stubbornness, naturally.

My problem with your post is as follows; you come out saying that trying to dominate the game against 'quality opposition', is something we can't do at the moment, yet express anger that (in your opinion), Brendan isn't trying to do so. You are apparently disappointed that the manger's tactics were 'spot on', expecting 'something more'.   

Give me strength...this is the reason I involve myself so little with the forum. Too many people without an iota of knowledge feel it is incumbent upon them to critique the manger, a man who has far more knowledge of the team, and almost certainly football, than they do.

[DanA]

Then there is the fact the players are probably a bit tired at the minute after a draining game midweek in the FA cup and knowing they will have to back it up again against City

[woof]

I thought Luis is such a great player. Not only did he score the goal, he played his defensive line well and supported Johnson every way he could. You can't ask more than what he put in.

Overall, it felt like a loss because we gave up a 2-goal lead. Having said that, Arsenal could have leveled or gone 2-1 up at half time. Their cut and thrust is better than ours but I thought we defended well in the first half.

In the second half, the players just looked knackered. With Coutinho coming in and our chase of Ince, I hope BR can balance attack and defence. We need another DM as a cover for Lucas or at least make him competitive in that position.

In the end, a draw was perhaps a fair result but it left us deflated a little. Looking forward to another "defining" game vs City....

[Stalker]

Lucas and henderson pressed in the first half leaving gerrard as the deep midfielder.BR completely changed his tactics in the 2nd half and everyone sat deep instead of putting some pressure on the ball.Playing gerrard deeper was a good decision as he made some good tackles and also had the pace to recover.Lucas is a good dm who reads the game and makes good interceptions but doesnt have the pace to recover and make tackles.If BR had played him deep and allowed henderson & gerrard to press then we would have been more open.Lucas still needs time to recover after such a long injury break.It was a smart move to play gerrard in a deeper role imo.BR has been chopping and changing the midfield too much and i hope the trio of lucas,hendo and gerrard get a consistent run.

Rodgers setup requires a good set of midfielders and it is one of the main reasons why we have been conceding soft goals.I dont think having a better cb than skrtel or carra will completely solve our problem.One of the few differences of our current system to that of a van gaal setup is the defensive line.He always had a high line regardless of the quality of the defenders.I can understand Rodgers reasoning behind sitting deep but it will only hurt us.We have a good set of defenders and an excellent sweeper type keeper in reina to play this system.He may change it once he has his first choice fullbacks in their proper positions.Playing such an attacking style with a deep defensive line will only leave gaps for the opposition to exploit.Our deep midfielders will be sitting close to our cb's rather than recycling the ball.We will absolutely kill teams if we had xabi or a midfielder in the same mould.We miss xabi's positional sense more than anything and you could always see him recycle the ball after the opposition clear the ball.Our opponents didnt have much opportunities to counter us.I hope rodgers finds the right players for our midfield.

[Timbo's Goals]

All in all, a bewildering and stimulating array of posts and opinions on what went on down at Arsenal. From holding high lines to conceding deep lines and collective pressing to spacious containing the whole gamut is there and does make for fascinating reading. The level of attempted insight is impressive and just 10 years ago you would not have got a fraction of these attempts at trying to deconstruct what went on. So credit to all who've posted - even Dan who managed to wheedle in an exhausting phantom midweek FA cup game into the fray.

 

For me, I'm still sticking to my main take regarding jack Wilshere and his pivotal role in the game. As I see it in my simple way a player of that class simply transcends systems and tactics. We used to have one - albeit less mobile though with superior passing range - in Xabi. So I guess the simplest way I can try to convey the way I see how the game went is that if the lad had been playing for us instead of Arsenal we wouldn't be here now each giving our fourpennyworth as to why we ended up only sharing the points. At the end of the day it really is all still about players. 

[Not funny reecehenebry]

All in all, a bewildering and stimulating array of posts and opinions on what went on down at Arsenal. From holding high lines to conceding deep lines and collective pressing to spacious containing the whole gamut is there and does make for fascinating reading. The level of attempted insight is impressive and just 10 years ago you would not have got a fraction of these attempts at trying to deconstruct what went on. So credit to all who've posted - even Dan who managed to wheedle in an exhausting phantom midweek FA cup game into the fray.

 

For me, I'm still sticking to my main take regarding jack Wilshere and his pivotal role in the game. As I see it in my simple way a player of that class simply transcends systems and tactics. We used to have one - albeit less mobile though with superior passing range - in Xabi. So I guess the simplest way I can try to convey the way I see how the game went is that if the lad had been playing for us instead of Arsenal we wouldn't be here now each giving our fourpennyworth as to why we ended up only sharing the points. At the end of the day it really is all still about players.

Sure we all may just go home really lad. What's the point of playing if the other team has a better player than us. Funny after the fa cup game people were lauding Gerrard to the heights. Now we have young fellas destroying him. Fuck me.

We gave up midfield. Did you not see ours in attacking midfield play behind our best midfield general? Why was Gerrard behind Lucas for most of the second half?

[Timbo's Goals]

Sure we all may just go home really lad. What's the point of playing if the other team has a better player than us. Funny after the fa cup game people were lauding Gerrard to the heights. Now we have young fellas destroying him. Fuck me.

We gave up midfield. Did you not see ours in attacking midfield play behind our best midfield general? Why was Gerrard behind Lucas for most of the second half?

 

Ta for the lad bit.

Re what you said. Don't fully understand. I've already said what I've got to say in 3 or 4 previous posts.

As for the insinuation of defeatism in anything I've said - complete bollocks.

Recognizing a huge talent in the opposition ranks is the way I was reared as a Liverpudlian. First time was Gordon Banks in '62. Then George Best. Then Peter Osgood. And it's gone on from there through a legion of amazing talents who have outgunned us on the day. I'm just grateful the Wilshere-inspired Arsenal only managed the draw. Savouring talent such as theirs is part of what makes following football such a rare pleasure. The fanaticism for all things red, cock-eyed optimism that you can overcome anything/anyone on the day and a deep appreciation of amazing non-red talent are not mutually exclusive stances.

[Vulmea]

All in all, a bewildering and stimulating array of posts and opinions on what went on down at Arsenal. From holding high lines to conceding deep lines and collective pressing to spacious containing the whole gamut is there and does make for fascinating reading. The level of attempted insight is impressive and just 10 years ago you would not have got a fraction of these attempts at trying to deconstruct what went on. So credit to all who've posted - even Dan who managed to wheedle in an exhausting phantom midweek FA cup game into the fray.

 

thing is there is an element of truth in all of them - its never black and white all of the different facets play a part - it probably says more about the individual making the comment than the game the emphasis they place on the different factors.............


so your love of Wilshere anything else you want to share?

[Eeyore]

Ta for the lad bit.

Re what you said. Don't fully understand. I've already said what I've got to say in 3 or 4 previous posts.

As for the insinuation of defeatism in anything I've said - complete bollocks.

Recognizing a huge talent in the opposition ranks is the way I was reared as a Liverpudlian. First time was Gordon Banks in '62. Then George Best. Then Peter Osgood. And it's gone on from there through a legion of amazing talents who have outgunned us on the day. I'm just grateful the Wilshere-inspired Arsenal only managed the draw. Savouring talent such as theirs is part of what makes following football such a rare pleasure. The fanaticism for all things red, cock-eyed optimism that you can overcome anything/anyone on the day and a deep appreciation of amazing non-red talent are not mutually exclusive stances.

I think the thing is that it's fine to admire the opposition and to enjoy watching them perform at the top of their game it's just that you shouldn't do it whilst wearing a Liverpool shirt. We allowed Wilshire to pick the ball up under no pressure whatsoever to turn and to run at us which played right into Arsenal's hands.

The better a player is the less space you give him, you look to close him down and to stop the ball getting to him. We didn't do that we did what we did against United first half and sat off and allowed the opposition to play. At United when the penny finally dropped we got amongst them, Cleverley and Carrick ran the game first half and looked top drawer but were overrun 2nd half when we stopped admiring them and got amongst them.

Wilshire was great the other night but he won't get an easier game than the game our midfield gave him.

[PhaseOfPlay]

I think the thing is that it's fine to admire the opposition and to enjoy watching them perform at the top of their game it's just that you shouldn't do it whilst wearing a Liverpool shirt. We allowed Wilshire to pick the ball up under no pressure whatsoever to turn and to run at us which played right into Arsenal's hands.

The better a player is the less space you give him, you look to close him down and to stop the ball getting to him. We didn't do that we did what we did against United first half and sat off and allowed the opposition to play. At United when the penny finally dropped we got amongst them, Cleverley and Carrick ran the game first half and looked top drawer but were overrun 2nd half when we stopped admiring them and got amongst them.

Wilshire was great the other night but he won't get an easier game than the game our midfield gave him.

That's not always true. It depends on the player. Getting close to Messi is not going to help much because he's so good at turning and shielding and his close control is second to none. Same for Ronaldo. Sometimes you stop the ball from getting to the best player by cutting it off at source. Other times you can let them have the ball in certain areas only and then crowd them out in other areas. There are a lot of factors to consider (before you even get to your own team and THEIR abilities to deal with the player)

[Timbo's Goals]

thing is there is an element of truth in all of them - its never black and white all of the different facets play a part - it probably says more about the individual making the comment than the game the emphasis they place on the different factors.............


so your love of Wilshere anything else you want to share?

Shit!

My attraction to pasty faced dwarfs with crap sideburns finally outed. I guess it had to happen sometime.

 

[Eeyore]

That's not always true. It depends on the player. Getting close to Messi is not going to help much because he's so good at turning and shielding and his close control is second to none. Same for Ronaldo. Sometimes you stop the ball from getting to the best player by cutting it off at source. Other times you can let them have the ball in certain areas only and then crowd them out in other areas. There are a lot of factors to consider (before you even get to your own team and THEIR abilities to deal with the player)

I think the problem is that we didn't really try to do either we didn't close Wilshire down and we didn't try and stop the ball getting to him. Even worse we allowed him space to run into and to get up to speed because there was a massive gap between Henderson and Lucas and Gerrard. At times we had Wisdom, Carra, Agger and Johnson in a line across the penalty spot like 4 centre backs with Suarez and Downing filling in as full backs which left us with 7 players defending and Arsenal with the freedom of the midfield.

[PhaseOfPlay]

I think the problem is that we didn't really try to do either we didn't close Wilshire down and we didn't try and stop the ball getting to him. Even worse we allowed him space to run into and to get up to speed because there was a massive gap between Henderson and Lucas and Gerrard. At times we had Wisdom, Carra, Agger and Johnson in a line across the penalty spot like 4 centre backs with Suarez and Downing filling in as full backs which left us with 7 players defending and Arsenal with the freedom of the midfield.

I think you're right about that. I think we were set up to force them to play over us, or go wide and cross, and we would defend the central area. It worked for a lot of the game, but it has to work for all of the game. It would have almost been better to play a legitimate two banks of four, with Suarez underneath Sturridge and dropping in as a 5th midfielder if needed. But hindsight is a great thing. The important thing is that Rodgers looks at it, takes the best bits from the performance, and does more work on the weak bits for the next time we choose to play that way.

[Not funny reecehenebry]

Ta for the lad bit.

Re what you said. Don't fully understand. I've already said what I've got to say in 3 or 4 previous posts.

As for the insinuation of defeatism in anything I've said - complete bollocks.

Recognizing a huge talent in the opposition ranks is the way I was reared as a Liverpudlian. First time was Gordon Banks in '62. Then George Best. Then Peter Osgood. And it's gone on from there through a legion of amazing talents who have outgunned us on the day. I'm just grateful the Wilshere-inspired Arsenal only managed the draw. Savouring talent such as theirs is part of what makes following football such a rare pleasure. The fanaticism for all things red, cock-eyed optimism that you can overcome anything/anyone on the day and a deep appreciation of amazing non-red talent are not mutually exclusive stances.

I think Wilshire will be the best English of the last 30 odd years. However admiring him is one thing. We did nothing to stop him.

[Eeyore]

I think you're right about that. I think we were set up to force them to play over us, or go wide and cross, and we would defend the central area. It worked for a lot of the game, but it has to work for all of the game. It would have almost been better to play a legitimate two banks of four, with Suarez underneath Sturridge and dropping in as a 5th midfielder if needed. But hindsight is a great thing. The important thing is that Rodgers looks at it, takes the best bits from the performance, and does more work on the weak bits for the next time we choose to play that way.

I think we hadn't quite got to grips with how to fit Gerrard and Suarez into a 4-3-3 / 4-2-3-1 and have upped the ante with the acquisition of Sturridge and Coutinho. Two players who have massively increased our attacking options against the weaker teams but for me have created as many problems as they solve against the top sides.

Again I can see the merits of a 4-4-1-1 against sides like Arsenal but I really struggle to see how to fit Sturridge, Suarez and Gerrard into the same side in that formation. Maybe we need to do what Ferguson does and what Kenny did at the Emirates last season and keep some of the fire-power on the bench until later in the game.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Sounds about right to me. It had an obvious effect against United too, to be able to bring Sturridge on at half time - almost a small show of "strength", if you like.

[Timbo's Goals]

I think Wilshire will be the best English of the last 30 odd years. However admiring him is one thing. We did nothing to stop him.

I can see your frustration the way you perceive it. I'm just not sure it's fair to say we did nothing and as a rider to that I'm not sure in any case exactly how you deal with it.

Even if we still had Mascherano to man mark him I'm not sure if he'd quell it. As PoPlay mentioned in his post a player like Messi - and in that midfield role Wilshere has most if not all the twists and turns, unfeasibly quick feet and close control of Messi - it's far easier said than done stopping a gifted twister and turner with an electrifying burst of pace like Wilshere even if you've a Mascherano to attempt it.

And then again even crowding a talent like that isn't necessarily guaranteed to work - notwithstanding the fact that it makes room elsewhere for other decent players to perhaps take advantage of if you don't happen to win possession or the ball isn't syphoned backwards by the opposition.

As it is one of the reasons the opposition crowding us in midfield seems to work so well for the opposition is surely because we haven't got a talent like Wilshere who can slip the net time and again and who isn't scared to look the crowding in the face and try to outsmart it. Against more limited players crowding them can be well worth the effort as they either lose possession or look for the escape pass behind them to avert the problem of the opposition crowding them.

The rare talents like Wilshere often see that sort of situation as a chance to slip the net. Often if they do lose it their quick feet win it back immediately. With lightning close skills and feet he's blessed with he uses the drawing of players to them to spark a break either by a burst of pace or a threaded pass which takes those doing the crowding out of the game.

I'm not saying we shouldn't try different tactics to nullify someone like him. Nor that we necessarily attempted to combat it in the best way on Wednesday night. All's I'm saying is that sometimes whether you like it or not a player like that is just going to impose himself on the game and on lesser players no matter what. It's why by the end of the game I didn't necessarily see Wednesday as 2 points dropped but more as one point kept. Sure I'd have rejoiced if we'd somehow kept the lead but right from the kick off it always looked to me that Arsenal were more than capable of carving us up. 

[PhaseOfPlay]

I can see your frustration the way you perceive it. I'm just not sure it's fair to say we did nothing and as a rider to that I'm not sure in any case exactly how you deal with it.

Even if we still had Mascherano to man mark him I'm not sure if he'd quell it. As PoPlay mentioned in his post a player like Messi - and in that midfield role Wilshere has most if not all the twists and turns, unfeasibly quick feet and close control of Messi - it's far easier said than done stopping a gifted twister and turner with an electrifying burst of pace like Wilshere even if you've a Mascherano to attempt it.

And then again even crowding a talent like that isn't necessarily guaranteed to work - notwithstanding the fact that it makes room elsewhere for other decent players to perhaps take advantage of if you don't happen to win possession or the ball isn't syphoned backwards by the opposition.

This is a key point that gets missed when people talk about the statistic of top teams paying the most wages, and wages correlated to position in the league. One doesn't lead to the other, i.e. paying high wages doesn't necessarily lead to higher position. What happens is that rich clubs pay more money to prise top talents away to their club in order to have the most effective threats in each position, so that it becomes difficult for opposition teams to isolate one single threat. That's why we can be flat track bullies this season - because most lower-half teams have one threat, or two at most; if we stop them, we stop their team. Teams like Arsenal, City, United and Chelsea have multiple threats, and stopping one just allows another one to be free. So we can't overload a single player like Wilshere, because overloading his position means a talented player is free in another one. If we overload that position too, we then leave even more space for the third threat, etc. Until we can match the big teams man for man, we will have to make adjustments and concessions at times.

As it is one of the reasons the opposition crowding us in midfield seems to work so well for the opposition is surely because we haven't got a talent like Wilshere who can slip the net time and again and who isn't scared to look the crowding in the face and try to outsmart it. Against more limited players crowding them can be well worth the effort as they either lose possession or look for the escape pass behind them to avert the problem of the opposition crowding them.

The rare talents like Wilshere often see that sort of situation as a chance to slip the net. Often if they do lose it their quick feet win it back immediately. With lightning close skills and feet he's blessed with he uses the drawing of players to them to spark a break either by a burst of pace or a threaded pass which takes those doing the crowding out of the game.

I'm not saying we shouldn't try different tactics to nullify someone like him. Nor that we necessarily attempted to combat it in the best way on Wednesday night. All's I'm saying is that sometimes whether you like it or not a player like that is just going to impose himself on the game and on lesser players no matter what. It's why by the end of the game I didn't necessarily see Wednesday as 2 points dropped but more as one point kept. Sure I'd have rejoiced if we'd somehow kept the lead but right from the kick off it always looked to me that Arsenal were more than capable of carving us up.

[Eeyore]

This is a key point that gets missed when people talk about the statistic of top teams paying the most wages, and wages correlated to position in the league. One doesn't lead to the other, i.e. paying high wages doesn't necessarily lead to higher position. What happens is that rich clubs pay more money to prise top talents away to their club in order to have the most effective threats in each position, so that it becomes difficult for opposition teams to isolate one single threat. That's why we can be flat track bullies this season - because most lower-half teams have one threat, or two at most; if we stop them, we stop their team. Teams like Arsenal, City, United and Chelsea have multiple threats, and stopping one just allows another one to be free. So we can't overload a single player like Wilshere, because overloading his position means a talented player is free in another one. If we overload that position too, we then leave even more space for the third threat, etc. Until we can match the big teams man for man, we will have to make adjustments and concessions at times.

Isn't the answer though not to overload a player but to get compact and to overload the area of the pitch that you force them to play in. For me me were too stretched against Arsenal and we left pockets for Arsenal players to drop into and to play between the lines. If the defence pushes up 10-15 yards and Sturridge drops off closer to his midfield then you compress the play and you stop Arsenal's midfield from getting any space. Pretty much what Arsenal did to us at Anfield.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Isn't the answer though not to overload a player but to get compact and to overload the area of the pitch that you force them to play in. For me me were too stretched against Arsenal and we left pockets for Arsenal players to drop into and to play between the lines. If the defence pushes up 10-15 yards and Sturridge drops off closer to his midfield then you compress the play and you stop Arsenal's midfield from getting any space. Pretty much what Arsenal did to us at Anfield.

Yes. And I think that's what we tried to do for the most part against Arsenal - compress the space in front of goal. But you have to be disciplined for the full 90+ minutes, and I there were definite patches when we weren't - notably when they scored their second goal - we had too much space in front of the back four, and when the ball went to Giroud and he laid it off, there was ample space for Walcott to line up the shot. In fact, if I remember correctly, he probably had enough space to take an extra touch if he needed it.

I will say, though, that speed is a factor, and I can see why we dropped to where we did - when we pushed up late in the second half on one particular passage of play, they broke down the left through Walcott, and it was only Gerrard's intervention that disrupted it. I think it might be the case that the players aren't confident yet that they can take the game to the big teams. Some of that might filter down from the manager. Or it might be a case that players go into their shell no matter what the manager says. That happens. But it's hard to tell. Tactically, we did a lot of things right, and a few things wrong (players AND manager). My hope is that they analyse the game, see what went right and improve it, and see what went wrong and prevent it from going wrong again. Perhaps the lesson is that we CAN take leads against the big teams, and when we do we should have the courage to step up and force the game a little more into their half of the field. That might be more an issue of increasing confidence rather than a tactical change that needs to be made?

[Carlos: Very Kickable]

Some great analysis as usual in here - thought i understood everything at 12 but its weird to think how much more I will understand the game twenty years from now thanks to threads like this.

Aside from all the highbrow tactical analysis however, I have a real bugbear about something that is much simpler and, I believe, contributed to us losing points. And that is - why oh why can't the substitutes on the bench be warmed up, in the right kit and ready to go at a second's notice if the manager want to throw them on?

Given that they are paid 60k a week is it really too much to ask that they are on standby for the 90 minutes a couple of time a week ready to scramble when necessary?

Instead we have pressure down our left flank and Suarez is clearly struggling with fatigue - Rodgers asks Enrique to come on and by the time he has finished faffing about putting on his kit we are two goals down.

NFL, ice hockey, basketball players are always ready to go at an instant's notice why not us?

Again, it comes down to a question of mentality - forget the formations, forget the tiki-taka - what cost us was the failure to be prepared and professional enough to do the simple things to hurt the opposition when called upon.

They're paid enough to play like their lives depend on it - the least you could ask is that they're actually wearing the requisite kit 

[keyo]

whlst this is spot on, this is where systems and patterns of play come in, and where manager's earn their corn....against arsenal, whilst we seemed to set up in a way that appeared to accomodate our better attacking players (sturridge and suarez) and at the same time nullify one of arsenal's threats (sagna linking with walcott), this is the only area where tactically we seemed to have a plan to deal with arsenal....whether it is personnel or the plan not being implemented properly, we seem not to have had any plan to wrest control of the midfield and deal with arsenal's creative threat of cazorla or the attacking threat of podolski.......neither did we impose what we would recognise as our system or style of play

the team we had under benitez at it's height could do both, something it had to do in europe against teams like barca, milan, even chelsea, teams with better squads, and probably better teams on paper....but it is hard to sustain, and easier to sustain with better players and greater depth.....something we got close to but never achieved in the end.....under rodgers, i would suggest we are short of the players in terms of quality and depth in order either impose our style or interrupt quality opposition, (harsh maybe, but i think fair, the question would be how far from the depth and the quality needed are we?)