Topic: Southampton Round Table

[NigelManx]

Just to enter this team building debate if Rodgers is building from the front that would be the old West Ham idea perhaps of well we can win 4-3, every good team needs to be built from the back forward, Better to keep clean sheets you at worst get a point. Shanks built his team around a colossus at the back and a feisty withdrawn Center Forward. All teams need a strong spine that's not just folklore thats a fact.

As for Barca  yes they built the team around some good quality passers and movers on the ball but they also made sure they had the likes of Puyol and Marquez and now Pique and Mascherano to shore up the back as well. All great teams have had relatively strong defences in place. So if Rogers decided he would build from the front well frankly he went against all forms of football common sense in my opinion, so did he show FSG a dodgy dossier.

The first priority should always be stop them scoring the second is score yourself, might not be esoteric and pretty but you know it gets you points all season. Lets face it we won many a title with these sort of teams did we complain did we hell.

so agree with this..and the model works because when away from home you always have to stifle the opposition first and then impose.You need to take pressure off and if one goal is so much easier to score then say 4

[Vulmea]

But we can't say where his squad building has wrong, when he hasn't really had the time to put his own mark on it.

More to the point... did he expect too much from the squad he's got? Did he over rate them and what they are capable of by expecting them to play to his system?

I think they're valid questions. But saying he got it wrong isn't, not when all the circumstances aren't taken into consideration.

Normally I'd agree team selection and subs they are the preserve of the manager - he knows who's slept well, who's got the sniffles, an ankle knock, a dodgy shoulder etc - but Saturday it wasn't just the selection but the tactics that selection were asked to play - the set up was poor everybody including Saints knew what was going to happen and it did - and we used Henderson and Lucas anyway - was he so restricted in his tactical choices or squad that he couldn't have done better - I dont think so - if its valid to praise him when he gets it right - its valid to criticise him when he gets it wrong - he got it wrong -

[DanA]

Build from the back is not just the selection its the way you ask them to play, he tried to turn them into a short passing defence around their own box waiting for the other team to leave gaps for an outlet pass, but we didnt and still do not have defenders who can do that with great competence.

You are right when he arrived the defence didn't look like it needed fixing, but he changed the way he wanted them to play and now it needs fixing.
Maybe he should have been a little bit more pragmatic and not  tried to change things from day one. Funny enough the defender who adapted best to his short passing style was the one i least expected to be able to, shame he is retiring.

But how was he to know the defense couldn't adapt to what he wanted until he tried? How much time did he get with Skrtel and Agger before the season to make a call? They were at the Euro's until quite late if I remember correctly.

*And I say this with the caveat that our defensive record this season actually isn't that bad.

[Gnurglan]

Rafa built from back to front, and bought accoringly. We went through a succession of forwards to fit the final piece of the jigsaw until we got Torres.

Rodgers is building from front to back. He has bought accordingly. You don't need to "defend first" - it's a cliche. It doesn't matter where you build your team from, as long as you build. Rodgers knows more than most that it doesn't matter how good your coaching, you still need the raw materials to work with. He's fixed a glaring problem from last season. It looks like he'll fix this season's major problem in the transfer window. Let's see how that goes. If he can maintain or improve this season's attack, and get the right defence to compliment that, then yes, he will succeed.

His approach is different and he's done well with the attacking game. Time is needed. These points I agree with. We need the raw material too. But why not adjust our approach more to suit the raw material we have at our disposal? Like your suggestion from before, use 3 CBs. Don't rely on Allen to be able to step in for Lucas.

I worry that we're seeing too much of a "build from the front" approach. That it becomes the opposite of GH's "build from the back". GH made us so back heavy (3 CBs in the back four, plus defensive midfielders) that he needed the attacking players to be perfect, or it didn't work. Now we're good going forward, but the consequences are that our back four/five look very fragile. A unit that looked solid last season is now our weakest link. We haven't got the right balance. This is an approach that is more pleasing on the eye. But do we risk a situation where our defenders are the ones who have to be perfect?

The real concern is that we've replaced almost the entire group of attacking players to address that part of our game. Next is our defensive midfield and defence. If our approach so far is the one to go with, we're talking a whole new team for our system to work.

[Draex]

Sorry to only comment about this in such a rich thread, but am I really alone in feeling that in terms of a player whom you can trust to play alongside Lucas and still create AND fill in for him when he's out, Allen is pretty much as close to it as it gets?

Honestly the Lucas role, the single pivot role is INCREDIBLY difficult to play and most defensive midfielders in the world can't because they lack the positional acumen. Allen has decent positional sense and a good tackle on him. I don't really see a player who is capable of playing the single pivot role to a decent standard AND adding another dimension while playing alongside Lucas.

Allen is good enough to be a defensive midfielder in a double pivot, I think for example Allen-Henderson would work pretty fine when Lucas is out. Do you see a top-class player content with sitting on the bench when Lucas is fit?

That's the point, you bring in someone who can play alongside Lucas, play instead of Lucas or someone who can fill in at left back or center back for example - there are pleanty of options out there, but my concern is we aren't looking.

Allen and Gerrard don't work as a two, if you introduced Henderson as well, then who knows..

[stewy17]

I was a bit concerned on saturday when I seen the team, not because of no Carragher or Lucas, but because of the front 3 and the imbalance this causes within the team.

I thought Rodgers made a brave team selection against Spurs last week in the first half but I thought it failed. We were overran in the centre and Spurs controlled the game pretty much up until the point that Allen was introduced. Allen himself didn't play particularly well but his presence in the team gave us a controlling influence in the midfield which really helped us get back into the game.

Rodgers went for the 4-3-3, it failed and he changed it eventually to great rewards. I was therefore surprised that he picked the same formation against southampton (with the loss of Lucas' defensive abilities). It seemed a little naive to me.

What we essentially played v Spurs first half and v Soton for the whole game was 4-2-4. it leaves the Defence with limited protection centrally and on the wings and means we're overrun in midfield unless our two lads in centre midfield have the game of their lives. It doesn't matter if you're Gerrard/Lucas/Mascherano/Pirlo, if you're outnumbered and get limited help from the front 4 then you're going to struggle.

I also feel really sorry for Henderson. I felt that he was playing his best football since coming to the club and he's been ceremoniously bombed out to make way for Allen/Coutinho/Sturridge.

I understand that Rodgers is going to try and get both Coutinho and Sturridge into the starting lineup but I don't agree that it should be at the expense of a central midfielder. For me it'd be Gerrard, Lucas and Henderson/Allen with a front three from Suarez, Sturridge/Coutinho/Downing.

I hope Rodgers sees this and addresses it in his next team selections. It seems pretty glaring to me.

Trying it against spurs was admirable, persisting against Southampton appeared to be a mistake. If he carries on into our next game and we're outplayed again then he's rightly (in my opinion) going to be open to criticism.

[BCCC]

You don't get anything for nothing and if you aren't prepared to do the basics then you end up with your arse kicked. No point over analysing it, we put fuck all in so can't be that surprised to get fuck all out.

Hopefully a bad day at the office, not seen as many of our team not turn up in a long time. Very painful viewing.

[DanA]

His approach is different and he's done well with the attacking game. Time is needed. These points I agree with. We need the raw material too. But why not adjust our approach more to suit the raw material we have at our disposal? Like your suggestion from before, use 3 CBs. Don't rely on Allen to be able to step in for Lucas.

Honest question. Given Carragher was injured, prior to the game would you have felt it a bigger risk to play Coates/Wisdom as a 3rd CB or Allen as a DM. Prior to the game I probably would have gone with Allen but also played Henderson instead of Sturridge. I think it's a bigger risk to play Coates who's underdone and at times been woeful.

[Mutton Geoff]

Honest question. Given Carragher was injured, prior to the game would you have felt it a bigger risk to play Coates/Wisdom as a 3rd CB or Allen as a DM. Prior to the game I probably would have gone with Allen but also played Henderson instead of Sturridge. I think it's a bigger risk to play Coates who's underdone and at times been woeful.

I think the majority are amazed that we didn't go for a three with Henderson in with his pressing game, i think you could have kept the same back four and left out Sturridge in my opinion. Sturridge is good but maybe not the right game for the formation that allows him to play in.

[mkingdon]

It seems everyone here identified the issue with our set up, if not before the game, then certainly very quickly once it started.  Assuming BR knows football better than all of us here (let's hope so anyway), I just don't understand why things were not changed earlier than they were.

Was he afraid of the stigma of changing things during the first half? With things going so badly why not take immediate action with us still in the game?

There is some serious surgery required in the summer.  It looks like we have the attacking options we were missing at the start of the season, but the balance is out, and playing 4 up top is not the answer.

Two CBs and a DM are a must have before we kick a ball next season.  Fixing Allen's shoulder would be a good idea too, as maybe that is somehow linked to his form and confidence which seemed to have vanished in recent months.

[Vulmea]

Going back to the original question which is a far more interesting than the 'Rodgers is naive' nonsense which should be left in the post match thread. What is noticeable in both this game and part of the Spurs game is our attack is getting isolated from the rest of the team. Having Suarez in the genius role means he can be excused tracking back duties but than means the others have to work harder but there are reasons why at times it's not gelling.

Coutinho is fantastic but talk about baptism of fire, he's concentrating on adapting to the pace and physicality of the premiership and playing in a totally new team, attacking wise he's brilliant but it will take time for him to run back and link and provide options.  Sturridge is also still finding his feet but you can bet that Rodgers will be looking for solutions, Downing was great for parts of the Spurs game but has to continue his improvement by realising he has to roll his sleeves up and get involved in games like this. Isolation isn't an option. Defensively Lucas's injury scare threw Rodgers and I think he fell back on Allen who played the in this role early season rather than start with Henderson who's  energy was needed, after all His confidence has been improving after being left out and forcing his way into the reckoning, where as Allen is carrying an injury and has had a hard season.

When we concede our mentality hasn't been honed like Man Utd and there is a tendency to become fragile and that leads to mistakes fantastic players like Johnstone start to look average and the fear spreads, that is why the likes of Downing goes missing, if I'm not there I can't be blamed.

I think it was a bad day at the office, we are not there but at times can play fantastic attacking football and look like world beaters but the team is unbalanced and we need to improve how we defend as a unit and bring in a class centre back. Sad thing is we couldn't afford to lose this game and that has upset us all but portraying Rodgers as Naive is ridiculous all managers have to put their theories into practice and have setbacks, we'll see how good he is at sorting the problems next season, he's only had his attack since January, it's jut come a bit too late to get fourth and that is what is hard to accept, the big picture, I'm optimistic if we buy well.

The first post I've seen that puts some sense into what might have happened - - dont buy it though

Is the intent to play next season as 442/424? If not why do you need Downing and Coutinho starting? Is the ineffectiveness down to Coutinho's inexpereince in the Prem or the fact he isn't ever going to be that type of player or the fact the opposition control midfield? where Downing and Coutinho asked to tuck in and help?

What role was Suarez actually playing because he looked to be leading the line at times second half - I like the idea of a mobile strike force but for that to work they need a stable platform behind them, we never had that - I think BR is trying to cheat and play his 433 but with two upfront and its not working - its not necessarily naive just wrong - its another game where it smacks more of the art of the possible and experimenting than of getting 3 points. Long term that may be best and without being inside the lads head who knows but in terms of that game  nah .

[Sangria]

Probably the biggest most important signing we could make this summer would be an experienced assistant manager

We definitely need an experienced ass man.

[The G in Gerrard]

Coutinho did a great job defensively against Spurs though didn't he?

[Mutton Geoff]

We definitely need an experienced ass man.

nice to see you are getting to the bottom of this dilemma.

[b_joseph]

Coutinho did a great job defensively against Spurs though didn't he?

He worked hard, like they all do for the most part. But it was still a game that we were overran, until we made the obvious change to plug in another CM.

Its up to the Manager to put his players in the best areas to succeed. If he does that, then you question to players but if he doesnt do that, then the players are defenseless..their weaknesses become exposed and their strengths neutralized.

If Brendan had spent a substantial part of his first two transfer budgets on replacing players at the back there would have been bedlam on here - and rightly so.

Summer 12? yes..Winter 13? Not so much IMO because we pretty much came to the conclusion about our defensive issues by then. Plus, just a small thing like finding a proper DM to back up Lucas wouldnt have eaten that much into the budget...I'd like to think anyway.

I think the majority are amazed that we didn't go for a three with Henderson in with his pressing game, i think you could have kept the same back four and left out Sturridge in my opinion. Sturridge is good but maybe not the right game for the formation that allows him to play in.

Even if you take away the pressing, just the simple fact of having another body in there would have been massive. Allen vs Spurs didnt press them, he just came in and offered another body to fill a few gaps and just filling gaps is a big deal.
Then you allow Stevie to do his thing without any real issues when we are out of possession.

[Sangria]

He worked hard, like they all do for the most part. But it was still a game that we were overran, until we made the obvious change to plug in another CM.

Its up to the Manager to put his players in the best areas to succeed. If he does that, then you question to players but if he doesnt do that, then the players are defenseless..their weaknesses become exposed and their strengths neutralized.

Summer 12? yes..Winter 13? Not so much IMO because we pretty much came to the conclusion about our defensive issues by then. Plus, just a small thing like finding a proper DM to back up Lucas wouldnt have eaten that much into the budget...I'd like to think anyway.

At the very least, if you're going to rely on a not very athletic or not very strong player to be the last CM before getting to the defence, then you need to disrupt the hell out of the area in front of him so he doesn't have to do all the work himself. Alonso was at his most effective when he had Sissoko and then Mascherano doing that job. With our current squad, barring a fully fit Lucas, the closest fit we have is Henderson.

[Fat Scouser]

Don't be surprised to see Carra announced as defensive coach in the summer. And whatever your view of the lad is, he can organise a defence

[Mutton Geoff]

Don't be surprised to see Carra announced as defensive coach in the summer. And whatever your view of the lad is, he can organise a defence

Somewhere Rossi has just spat his coffee out, but i agree with that thought, i was thinking he could help at the academy but why not.

[JackWard33]

We definitely need an experienced ass man.

you've cracked it

[helmboy_nige]

I sympathise with the current team.  Only because I am exactly like them, only in fan form.  I'm the guy who thinks big before a match, but is found wanting when the chips are down.  Don't get me wrong, I sing and make noise, but when that nervousness seeps in, I'm guilty as charged and can often found hiding behind my hands too afraid to even speak.

Inside I 'believe'.  I've seen enough miracles to know that we can beat anyone and achieve anything.  Problem is that when that belief moves onto something more tangible we (and I mean players and fans) struggle to cope.

We beat Spurs in what was probably only the second time this season that the team has got down and dirty (the other being West Ham away).  What followed was a week of talk about 4th place, predictions of winning the next 3, 4 or 9 games.  As usual we got far too carried away.  I'm naturally cautious about our chances before any match (but inside am holding back the desire to just shout out that we'll win 5-0), but I was crapping myself before this one.

It wasn't that I felt Southampton are a superb team, it was the way we as fans dismissed them.  It was the way the team sheet dismissed them.  We turned up expecting it to be easy (read the pre-match thread) and got our arses handed to us, and deservedly so.

That's why I was so nervous, every time 'we' talk big, we get knocked back down. 

'We're in the hunt for second' - Lose next match
'We can finish top 4' - Lose next match
'We just beat Tottenham who are the best team in the country on form' - Lose next match

Of course I'm just a fan, so really it doesn't matter if I'm nervous, but it just seems to me that the players react terribly to any suggestion that we might actually achieve something this season.  We had the same problem last year as well iirc.

In the grand scheme of things, the result was not a disaster.  Despite my cautious attitude, I figured 6th place on around 60 points this season would be a reasonable first season for a new manager.  I still think we are on for around that.

The problems in the game are not purely tactical, although I agree with many that to play a two man central midfield of Allen/Gerrard is asking for trouble (and in a way shows disrespect for our opponents).  We're trying to force 4 attacking players in and it just won't work against a team that is halfway decent (unless we also had top players behind them).

Even if we'd started with 3 in midfield I am not convinced we'd have won this one as the players seemed simply not up for it.  Why that is and how we fix it I have no idea, because the only pattern I've found has been the one above, related to us screwing up after we start to 'big up' our chances.

For me let's fix the tactical problems first.  We should start games away or against decent opposition with 3 men in midfield.  It's not like we are in any other comps and need to rest players, so the decision to go all out attack I find baffling.  I'm sure the plan was to try to kill them off early, but that's a dangerous game if they sneak upfield and score first.

Additionally, while it's nice seeing 4 men in attack, picking three out of them and saving one as a late sub to 'influence' when players are tired seems like a way to go.

From a player perspective, I don't have a problem with rebuilding from the front and that certainly explains why we leak so many goals.  It's clear that Skrtel is going to be replaced and I wouldn't be surprised to see a new left back and keeper, but for now, this is what we have.  I feel sorry for Brad jones.  I like the guy, he seems like the kind of chap you'd pop to the pub with, but he gives me zero confidence whenever the ball is within 20 yards of him.  That might be harsh, and I don't mean it to be, but there it is.

From a mental perspective I seriously have no idea.  Why do I (and seemingly 80%) of the ground go as silent as OT when the going gets tough?  It needs fixing, but all I've come up with so far is that winning more matches will breed confidence.  Problem seems to be though that despite winning the previous three, one defeat knocks confidence more than the wins increase it.  Or so it seems.

Anyway, long ramble almost over.  I maintain my view that we have progressed well this season and that 6th place and around 60 points would be a good season and illustrate that we are halting the regression.  We 'can' finish 5th, but let's keep it realistic.  We will lose another game between now and the end of the season.  We may lose more than one.  Doesn't mean we are shit.  Just means we are a work in progress and that's were we are.

Final point to Southampton.  Credit to them.  Played really well and deserved their win.

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

Going back to the original question which is a far more interesting than the 'Rodgers is naive' nonsense which should be left in the post match thread. What is noticeable in both this game and part of the Spurs game is our attack is getting isolated from the rest of the team. Having Suarez in the genius role means he can be excused tracking back duties but than means the others have to work harder but there are reasons why at times it's not gelling.

Coutinho is fantastic but talk about baptism of fire, he's concentrating on adapting to the pace and physicality of the premiership and playing in a totally new team, attacking wise he's brilliant but it will take time for him to run back and link and provide options.  Sturridge is also still finding his feet but you can bet that Rodgers will be looking for solutions, Downing was great for parts of the Spurs game but has to continue his improvement by realising he has to roll his sleeves up and get involved in games like this. Isolation isn't an option. Defensively Lucas's injury scare threw Rodgers and I think he fell back on Allen who played the in this role early season rather than start with Henderson who's  energy was needed, after all His confidence has been improving after being left out and forcing his way into the reckoning, where as Allen is carrying an injury and has had a hard season.

When we concede our mentality hasn't been honed like Man Utd and there is a tendency to become fragile and that leads to mistakes fantastic players like Johnstone start to look average and the fear spreads, that is why the likes of Downing goes missing, if I'm not there I can't be blamed.

I think it was a bad day at the office, we are not there but at times can play fantastic attacking football and look like world beaters but the team is unbalanced and we need to improve how we defend as a unit and bring in a class centre back. Sad thing is we couldn't afford to lose this game and that has upset us all but portraying Rodgers as Naive is ridiculous all managers have to put their theories into practice and have setbacks, we'll see how good he is at sorting the problems next season, he's only had his attack since January, it's jut come a bit too late to get fourth and that is what is hard to accept, the big picture, I'm optimistic if we buy well.

Thank God for Albie.  That is where I thought the interesting discussion lay.  Can Rodgers adapt this current line-up to marry more control to the attacking guile or does he need to revert to a more pragmatic midfield three at the expense of one of Coutinho/Sturridge/Downing? 

If we want to persevere with the current line-up and shape then what needs to happen in order to prevent us having opening half hours like that at St. Mary's?  Can the roles of the current players be tweaked?  Is there a need for a creative but hardworking midfielder instead of Downing?   Do we need a pacy leggy defensive midfielder in the Dembele mould?

[exiledinyorkshire]

Normally you two speak sense this time it just seems like you've got your head in the sand.

Any team can get beat - thats not the issue most people have - the problem was thinking we'd get beat before we kicked a ball and being sure of it after 5 minutes and not only that but being able to predict exactlly how it would happen. We were even gifted a goal near half time which should have switched the momentum and we failed to take that opportunity as well.

If BR's system is so heavily dependant on individuals why persist with it when you dont have them? Even when you get them what happens when those players your dependant on break down or get suspended. You need back up we haven't got them either. If you have a philosophy of 'death by football' why can't we keep the ball any better than we did at the start of the season - if it needs better players then dont don it until you have them.

BR has said he wants two players for each position - to play the way he wants to will need a major overhaul if thats the case - he has warned in the past that it'll take years - Chopper is half right we'd need a whole team (not squad - we have roughly half the players he needs) of players - thats two, three or four transfer windows and a lot of disapointment while playing a system thats not suited to the players at hand. It will mean inconsistant performances and a failure to address key problems until the right  players arrive...........sounds familiar

Its a daft way of going - getting 'used' to the system is a fine sentiment if you going to stick with those players or bring them up from the youth ranks but
if you are looking to overhaul your squad and its not working you are just getting used to failure and a broken system until the right players arrive. Bringing in Sturridge for example, the attacking system didn't suddenly shift into fluidity we just had a player that could play it. WE'd been wasting our time previously.

For a couple of months I thought the lad had gotten real and learned some pragmatism, his selection of Carra being a case in point, his clever use of Henderson and Allens poor form was recognised but this was a throw back. BR has talent he's done plenty of things right but.........

- did he merely underestimate Southampton - did he expect them to worry about us - to outscore them - what was his thinking? surely he didn't have the idea that we should turn up and beat them because they are bottom three- please god no - he gets praise when he gets things right - this he got wrong - no need to ignore it - he deserves criticism for it

the idea he deserves credit for being 'attacking' is also daft - he played the wrong formation - it worked well for 30 against spurs - they didn't expect it - we had confidence and the ball -   it was the wrong formation after 30 minutes against Spurs because we dropped off and it was the wrong formation very predictably from the off against Saints because we dropped off - we'd have been more attacking if we'd controlled midfield - having attacking players on the pitch doesn't make you more attacking - its how you play - it wasn't brave or bold it was naive. Brave would have been dropping one of the attacking in form players or selecting Wisdom at right back because of Johnsons form or a whole range of things - getting us to press them from the start taking the game to them - holding a high line - these are bold attacking ideas - not gifting them centre midfield and selecting two wide men and hoping to counter

Building from the back provides some confidence in getting a draw from the game - building some confidence - it means that if you do score you can hold on to it - is there anything inherently wrong in building from the front - didn't rafa suggest is it like putting the roof on before you've built your foundations?

i take your points. You can build from the front back or sides if you like, your still not going to have the finished article until you have built the whole thing. Building a team isnt like building a house, you never start from fresh. You renovate, you already have a team you simply recruit players for your particular philosophy where you need them.

Something i said over and over again towards the end of Rafas reign and although it was a wee bit disloyal to him, i still stand by it was this. If we are to play football never being able to complete the Rafa project, never quite getting him what he wants in the positions that he needs to finish the job, then please can we play some football in the mean time thats easy on the eye. Two projects Rafas failed to deliver the main goal " a league title" and Rodgers project may prove to be ultimately futile as well, but frankly i find Rodgers approach more in line with what i prefer.

Rafa would go to shitty little relegation troubled hell holes and put out sides that were workman like and get beaten. If rodgers is ever to win the title he will need to go to places like Southampton and play them off the park and win. He knows now what we all reckoned anyway, we not there yet. He knows his squad lacks depth and that his system isnt as effecient as he would like it to be yet.

I say, play the way you would like to play and be dammed. Dont fuck about with a half way house in order to finish 6 rather than 8th. play to the principles that you have settled on for your style, play that way until its so well engrained that you can play anybody that way and win. He may well of not selected the correct players, but he has his reasons for his team selections, forced and preffered. We got beaten by a poor team, Rafa did too.

 

[Timbo's Goals]

As ever with these threads there's some fabulous insightful analysis of what went wrong. I particularly liked the point someone just made about Gerrard and Johnston performing as if playing a team like Southampton was beneath them and how we might have been far better served by a hungry Joe Mr Piano Henderson and Norman Wisdom in their place.  Having grimaced almost continuosly through 90 minutes watching the two senior men's performances on the day I really can see a fine and possibly incontravertible thread of sound logic in what the poster was saying.

Nor by any means was that poster the only one to make a valid point. The opposite in fact. Indeed, as I read each successive post I find myself nodding inanely in agreement like a rear window Churchill even if I'd just happened to read entirely the opposite viewpoint in the post immediately above the one I'm nodding to. 

I guess the point is you can't be wrong in these things. When we perform as ineptly as we did both individually and collectively down at the Dell we can even pin the blame Pat Nevin for looking so goddam fuckin hideous and we wouldn't be far wrong.

As for me. My far too over-simplistic take on where we went wrong centres around the poor maligned Joe Allen and my lasting image from the game. The image I have is the stark contrast between the time and space afforded by our ever so polite statuesque midfield to any of the Southampton midfielders as they sauntered forward with the ball and our poor beleagured Little Joe, tongue hanging out, gasping for breath, clutching his shoulder attempting frantically to retain possession of the ball whilst a pack of voracious Southampton hyenas snapped mercilessly at him until he surrendered the thing.

As a microcosm to illustrate how we got absolutely fuckin mullered in Saturday's game by a team who had won just six times before we innocently entered their den I'm not sure we need to delve much deeper.

 

.

[Fuzion6]

This match more than any other got me asking the question - what exactly is Brendan's philosophy? When he came to the club and spoke to various fanzines about a 433 being his base formation, how he wanted to press up the field, control games and keep possession, play Suarez as a false 9 to get him closer to goal etc.

If we assess what Brendan did at Swansea, they very much played a 433 / 4231 and they were all about keeping possession and having a firm grip and control over games. Watching Swansea would often be a boring affair as they would kill games off by passing around and slowly take the will to live away from teams. In fact one of the big advantages of Rodgers of Kenny many felt was that he had a clear system which he played with and a very clear strategy which was to essentially control a game at all times. This compared to the less controlled, more random and helter-skelter approach of Kenny's team last year.

Now, I don't know what has happened but since January this team has looked nothing like how Rodgers set up at Swansea. Gone is the 433/4231 and in has come a very attacking 442 which many are calling a 424. Pressing is pretty much non exsitent and more surprisingly, we seem to have no control - or at least controlling a game does not seem to be the main objective. This has often worked - the laissez faire attitude has got the team some heavy victories but even in some of those games, the number of clear chances conceded to the opposition was relatively high.

Personally I quite like the less controlled and more direct style of play - but I am worried as to what exactly Brendan is trying to do. What is his philosophy right now because I am struggling to see how it matches what he did at Swansea and what he previously preached.

[Mutton Geoff]

showing your age Timbo its St Mary's now and then have stopped being alehouse footballers too

[Vulmea]

Thank God for Albie.  That is where I thought the interesting discussion lay.  Can Rodgers adapt this current line-up to marry more control to the attacking guile or does he need to revert to a more pragmatic midfield three at the expense of one of Coutinho/Sturridge/Downing? 

If we want to persevere with the current line-up and shape then what needs to happen in order to prevent us having opening half hours like that at St. Mary's?  Can the roles of the current players be tweaked?  Is there a need for a creative but hardworking midfielder instead of Downing?   Do we need a pacy leggy defensive midfielder in the Dembele mould?

I'm not sure you can look at it in isolation.

Did our CB's play any narrower - we looked to be wide still - the gap between them before the third goal was - well it was large, the coach and horses that drove through it was evidence enough -  was that down to an individual performance or a system which deliberately creates a large gap through the centre - create that gap in the centre and your midfield becomes key to plugging it - how are the midfield spaces - did we have two sitting deep - nope we looked to be playing the same staggered formation - so we had one player who needed to cover that space and still control midfield - it just didn't stack up

To play as BR wants us to play we have to protect the ball - keep it as along as we want even when pressed - we can't do that - without that basic ball retention a number of his ideas fall down and just leave us weak and exposed. Turn over the ball quickly in those circumstances and you are exposed through the middle which we have been with the CB's recovering position rather than defending.

Whats very odd is why he's switched - if as suggested he is trying to fit in his 4 offensive options - why is that? Neither Coutinho or Downing are nailed on first team picks - one is still learning the other solid but unspectacular - the easier option is to simply have Suarez nominally right, Sturridge through the centre and a n other on the left. Is he concerned about Suarez defensively - if he is just ask the fullback to hold and play Henderson on the side to cover him. He either doesn't rate the kid or he's waiting to unleash him next season, I hope its the latter, fear its the former.

I clearly dont understand the plan.

We could have a very solid central three - we have four players to play there - all of whom can play in at least two positions of the three with a few kids on top of that worth a look. All of whom probbaly look beter as a three than a two. BR says he wants 6  - adding cover for Lucas and a sixth player with a few goals in them (Sigurdson, Dempsey etc) is an option given Gerrards legs and the lack of goals elsewhere but its a nice to have rather than the must have at centre back. I still think Spearing would have 'done  a job' covering Lucas this season and Shelvey hasn't grown into the AM role as it was hoped he would but that would have been 6.

Clearly BR knows stuff we dont because on the face of it it was plain daft.

[Hinesy]

showing your age Timbo its St Mary's now and then have stopped being alehouse footballers too

[Timbo's Goals]

showing your age Timbo its St Mary's now and then have stopped being alehouse footballers too

You mean they moved?

 

About time too!! A right shithole that was.

 

Remember John McGrath, Geoff? A real bruiser. I seem to recall that's who Shanks was aiming at when he called them an alehouse team

[Banquo's Ghost]

The problem wasn't the two in the middle. You can play 4-4-2/4-2-4 and make adjustments to cope with a 5 in midfield. The problem wasn't Rodgers not changing things in the middle of the first half, because you can only do that once or twice before players will lose faith in you. The problem wasn't starting Lucas and bringing him off, because if he felt a twinge in the warm-up, without the medical staff monitoring it, it could have been much worse. Rodgers made a mistake of emphasis in this game, and he is certainly not blameless. Some people are talking like it's been every game, though, rather than a small handful. The team and players that made City look like chumps in their own home ground should be able to attack a Southampton side facing relegation until recently. There was a serious loss of intelligence and effort in key areas of the team. There was a clear delineation between who considered themselves attackers and who considered themselves defenders. And Gerrard showed in the 3rd goal the worst side of his game, not seen since Arsenal at home - failure to track back when the ball goes by him.

There is still a lot to sort out. But one game doesn't define the season, or Rodgers as a manager, or the team's progress as a whole. Those who seem to think it does, should be very upfront about their experiences in football management, because it's easy to say what you would have done from the comfort of your computer without the experience to back it up. It's clear on these threads the past day or so who has experience in the game and who hasn't. There's more to football than pressing "X" or "Triangle button", and a few posters would do well to understand that before slating the manager after every loss.

Again, thank you for your insight. Your posts are oases in a desert of FUD, and please keep them coming for those of us trying to learn and understand.

[Mutton Geoff]

You mean they moved?

 

About time too!! A right shithole that was.

 

Remember John McGrath, Geoff? A real bruiser. I seem to recall that's who Shanks was aiming at when he called them an alehouse team

yes to all of those points, never understood why Kevin went there as well.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Just to enter this team building debate if Rodgers is building from the front that would be the old West Ham idea perhaps of well we can win 4-3, every good team needs to be built from the back forward, Better to keep clean sheets you at worst get a point. Shanks built his team around a colossus at the back and a feisty withdrawn Center Forward. All teams need a strong spine that's not just folklore thats a fact.

As for Barca  yes they built the team around some good quality passers and movers on the ball but they also made sure they had the likes of Puyol and Marquez and now Pique and Mascherano to shore up the back as well. All great teams have had relatively strong defences in place. So if Rogers decided he would build from the front well frankly he went against all forms of football common sense in my opinion, so did he show FSG a dodgy dossier.

The first priority should always be stop them scoring the second is score yourself, might not be esoteric and pretty but you know it gets you points all season. Lets face it we won many a title with these sort of teams did we complain did we hell.

I know what you're saying, and I don't disagree, but how did it work for us last season, though? We built everything on a strong defence, and only scored 47 goals. Similarly, how did it work for us under Hodgson? The man's entire career has been built on "Defence-First" coaching. I just think it's a historical cliche to "build from the back first". It really doesn't matter how you build, as long as you build. You can get the defence right and not score enough goals and still be mid-table or lower. Or you can get the attack right and neglect the defence, and be Spurs under Ardiles (I was going to use Newcastle under Keegan as an example but I think their biggest problem was Keegan himself - losing composure and selling your best forward to a rival is not the way to develop confidence in the players. Phillipe Albert was a good signing from them, and they should have won something for the football they played). As much as I wanted to wait and see what Kenny did with the attack this season, I also want to wait and see what Rodgers does with the defence next season. If he makes one or two shrewd signings, then next season will see the City (x2), Arsenal, Everton and West Brom (home) games possible show different results - all other things being equal, that could be 11 extra points already, putting us right into the top four mix.

If you're given time, then it doesn't matter how you start your building. Building from the attack and scoring a lot of goals will give you as much confidence that you can win games as building from the back and conceding few. It doesn't matter which way you start - if you can prove to your players that you can get one side of the game right, they will have confidence that you might get the other side right. Again, though, we won't know until the next transfer window and the next season if Rodgers can identify good technical defenders that can hit the ground running. He can afford to take the hit on a forward or two (Borini, Assaidi) because last season our attack wasn't great, so any improvement, however small, is noticeable. On the other hand, whoever he buys in defence has to fulfill the promise of his vision straight away. If he gets it wrong, then it will play a big part in his future at the club. Ajax always built from the front, even in their recruitment to their academy. They played the attacking possession football before they got known internationally for it, but it wasn't until Vasovic was bought that they started to have real success (and he would have told everyone it was largely down to him ). By that time, though, they already had Cruyff, Groot and Swart.  They went from scoring 52 goals under Buckingham to scoring 79 goals and then 102 goals the season after that. So there is a precedent for what Rodgers is trying to do and his way of working - and I think it's rooted more in Ajax than it is in Barcelona.

[Kali Yuga]

For me, Rodgers choose correctly by building from the front first. Those big wins he's had have done wonders for him and the fans. Remember last season when it was a murderous ballache of stress up front? I do. Couldn't take another season like that without cracking my own head open. I'd much rather exchange a slightly better defence for a much better attack.

[wah00ey]

Great thread but something's missing for me - the attitude of some of the players stank.  I mean really stank.  Johnson couldn't be arsed - was just going through the motions - and Gerrard wasn't a lot better.  Downing's been so much better in recent weeks but was back to his lame previous incarnation on Saturday too.  Sturridge looked frustrated at the lack of any service too.

Anybody else pick up on this or am I in a minority of one here?

[PhaseOfPlay]

Some interesting discussion here, ill try to contribute some points.

Well, that was rather unpleasant. I'd say its hands down the worst performance since Bolton last year. When a team plays this badly, you have to distribute the blame accordingly, starting with the manager. Brendan fudged up, there I said it, but growing pains are expected with one so young and inexperienced. So actually, Ill revise my earlier statement, the blame lies also a bit with the club for not implementing the division of labour (technical director, or some sort of advisory commitee for) FSG announced. I think an older head, one who has seen it all, one that has 20-30 yrs of experience in the game would have advised him to approach this game differently. Brendan Rodgers arrogance cost us the game, but LFC is also to blame for not having some sort of check and balance system to try and minimize these types of human errors.

When I saw the line up pre game my first thought was: wait, no Lucas?! (later I learned it was precautionary)
The second thought in my head was: hang on, Gerrard is playing?! Against Southampton? Why? It makes no sense from a man management perspective. After narrowly winning the game at Spurs, after winning 4 in a row, after Gerrard playing every minute in the prem so far, this seemed to me to be A) exactly the type of game he should be rested in favour of Henderson because B) this is exactly the type of game Gerrard gets very complacent in (with Johnson being a culprit in the complacency sense as well).Hendo, on the other hand, has been playing 'hungry', he wants the minutes, he wants to impress and against Soton there would have little pressure on him to perform, as they aint exactly titans of Europe are they?

Thats why he had to bench Gerrard, because IF things go wrong in that scenario, and say, we go behind by 1-0, Rodgers would have had the option to introduce Gerrard who would NOT have been complacent, the Reds being down and all, but would have been in the right mindset. You cant play Gerrard week in week out and expect him to remain 'hungry' all the time, he aint 24 anymore. This is also somewhat applicable to Johnson, who is also already established, and seemed to have this air about him that he expected to win, effortlessly. An older head guiding Rodgers (with experience in top level football) would have noticed these things and mentioned them to Rodgers IMO, like a van Gaal. SO I would have liked to have seen Henderson and Wisdom instead of Johnson and Gerrard start, I think that would have been a clear cut example of smart man management, which is a skill like any other, which hopefully Rodgers will pick up with time. That is if he learns his lessons properly.

Now I thought that Rodgers had learned the lesson in the first half of the season that the Allen - Gerrard midfield doesn't work which is part of why I was so surprised by the line up. Now one more worry is his insistence on playing Allen through injury. Now I don't know the specific details of his injury but having had a wide assortment of shoulder/collar bone injuries myself (ranging from fracturing my sternum, manubrium and collarbone, to ripping the chords (ligaments?) between collar bone and shoulder blade), and several times playing through shoulder injury myself I can really sympathize with Joe Allen, I know whats it like to enter a duel with a shoulder injury and the limitations it imposes. It isn't impossible but playing in midfield becomes a bitch. I think he should have the surgery already and get it over with. I think Rodgers made a mistake playing him, but if not him, who else? These are the consequences of not picking up a real DM last summer I feel..

Jones needs to go. I like him and he aint a bad keeper but every time the ball comes to him, he BOOOOMS it away. This is completely antithetical to Rodgers philosophy of keeping possession of the ball. The thing that annoyed me the most is that Rodgers doesnt seem to react to it. When keepers at Ajax repeatedly try to blast the ball into orbit coaches will go completely nuts on the sidelines, yelling, gesticulating, cursing, exhortin enough pressure on the keepy to 'force' him to play the ball on the ground. Now its unfair to single out Jones for this, the entire team starting panicking, losing the patience to play the simple ball and to pass and move, instead booting the ball up the field hoping to find one of our 4 isolated attackers. I single Jones out because I feel that he cant play it on the deck, whilst others can and should, meaning that they underperformed whilst Jones did exactly what he is able to do, which in this system is not enough. Now I don't mind Rodgers changing the system, I don't mind playing 3-4-3 of 4231 or whatever, as long as he doesnt  (greatly) deviate from the underlying philosophy of pass and move. I think the way he implemented it this game, with the players he selected, was bound to fail. I hope he learns his lessons.

The midfield was non-existent, the attack isolated and the defence vulnerable. I don't get why people single out Skrtel as this is a team and manager failure. He should have been in front of his defender in the first goal, a smarter defender might have anticipated Johnson fucking up, as he aint the best with those types of crosses(I think a match fit Skrtel would have to tbf). The third goal you cant blame on him as well, or you can as in, he could have been positioned a bit better I feel, but as a CB myself I know that once you start to back peddle like that your cause is usually lost.

One of the first things I noticed about that goal. First one was Gerrard walking back. Second was that we were in a 4v2 situation so we had the numbers and the proximity to commit a tackle instead of standing off. Thirdly, Skrtel back-peddling, getting turned and then momentarily turning his back on the play. We defended in straight lines when pushing Rodriguez to the side would have been better in that situation. Instead, he got a free run right down the middle of the field. That was nothing to do with split centrebacks, or contain/pressing defences. It was defensive basics right out the window.

[G1 Jockey 4(betfair)]

Honest question. Given Carragher was injured, prior to the game would you have felt it a bigger risk to play Coates/Wisdom as a 3rd CB or Allen as a DM. Prior to the game I probably would have gone with Allen but also played Henderson instead of Sturridge. I think it's a bigger risk to play Coates who's underdone and at times been woeful.

in hindsight coates hasnt been woefull
agger and carra would ahve got done by mat smith like coates and skrtel did...also the everton back line.
we allowed oldham to get crosses in the box....end of.

coates hasnt had a proper run of games and only gets the odd game here and there.
hardly good preparation at all

i dont like 3 at the back but coates is the better coverer out of agger and skrtel....well you have to be if you played next to lugano lol

to me all 4 centre backs have looked out of sorts and its down to the system.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Is correct.

As for Vasovic, total legend. Dare I say the best Yugoslav sweeper. AS for him being a bit arrogant.. I remember in the 90s one of the doctors of Red Star came to Holland to buy medical equipment for his private practice and he stayed at our place for the week or so he was here. Vasovic had given him a present in Belgrade to give to Michael van Praag, Ajax' chairman. Now the good doctor told my mother to set up a meeting with the chairman, to which my mother responded with a pragmatic "this is the Netherlands, you have to set up these kinds of appointments months in advance." She called anyway, got van Praags assistant and was duly told the same thing she had told the doctor. The doctor was bemused "How is this possible, what disrespect" and stating "Vasovic will not like this one bit!" 

And he didn't.

Vasovic was a legend.

[Mutton Geoff]

I know what you're saying, and I don't disagree, but how did it work for us last season, though? We built everything on a strong defence, and only scored 47 goals. Similarly, how did it work for us under Hodgson? The man's entire career has been built on "Defence-First" coaching. I just think it's a historical cliche to "build from the back first". It really doesn't matter how you build, as long as you build. You can get the defence right and not score enough goals and still be mid-table or lower. Or you can get the attack right and neglect the defence, and be Spurs under Ardiles (I was going to use Newcastle under Keegan as an example but I think their biggest problem was Keegan himself - losing composure and selling your best forward to a rival is not the way to develop confidence in the players. Phillipe Albert was a good signing from them, and they should have won something for the football they played). As much as I wanted to wait and see what Kenny did with the attack this season, I also want to wait and see what Rodgers does with the defence next season. If he makes one or two shrewd signings, then next season will see the City (x2), Arsenal, Everton and West Brom (home) games possible show different results - all other things being equal, that could be 11 extra points already, putting us right into the top four mix.

If you're given time, then it doesn't matter how you start your building. Building from the attack and scoring a lot of goals will give you as much confidence that you can win games as building from the back and conceding few. It doesn't matter which way you start - if you can prove to your players that you can get one side of the game right, they will have confidence that you might get the other side right. Again, though, we won't know until the next transfer window and the next season if Rodgers can identify good technical defenders that can hit the ground running. He can afford to take the hit on a forward or two (Borini, Assaidi) because last season our attack wasn't great, so any improvement, however small, is noticeable. On the other hand, whoever he buys in defence has to fulfill the promise of his vision straight away. If he gets it wrong, then it will play a big part in his future at the club. Ajax always built from the front, even in their recruitment to their academy. They played the attacking possession football before they got known internationally for it, but it wasn't until Vasovic was bought that they started to have real success (and he would have told everyone it was largely down to him ). By that time, though, they already had Cruyff, Groot and Swart.  They went from scoring 52 goals under Buckingham to scoring 79 goals and then 102 goals the season after that. So there is a precedent for what Rodgers is trying to do and his way of working - and I think it's rooted more in Ajax than it is in Barcelona.

I enjoy reading your post but the stats for last season need to be taken in entirety yes we scored 47 but lets add the mammoth times we hit the woodwork, if only half of those go in you get a different picture.
My point is though you need to be secure at the back to if you like allow the forwards to have the confidence to try things and miss if that doesn't sound too ironic.
What i mean is the forwards will be under less pressure to score if we are not always chasing the game, and then with that slightly relaxed and confident mindset will actually score more often, in the knowledge that one goal might be enough, just like as quoted above the 1-0 Arsenal philosophy. With Shanks it was partly get the spine right hence he went for Rowdy and St John, he then built around these two in the knowledge that our defence would be solid and our attack effective without being that spectacular.
So back to the here and now, do you think Rodgers in his need to create this new system has put some needless doubts in their own ability with collectively all our still fairly young CB's?
 I leave Carra out of this whether its an old head but he has adapted well. I see both Skrtel and Agger making basic mistakes positional and in actual play that we hardly ever saw under Clarke ( defensive coach) last season, they seem unsure of what to do sometimes, and maybe me but at times i find myself shouting put it in the stands and we can regroup then.
As for Ajax even their success was built on yes Cruyff et al, after all Michels had a forward thinking philosophy and an old cliche but ahead of his times, a total genius in my opinion  but also Ajax relied on the likes off Krol as a sweeper or left WB, or Arie Haan CB or maybe the first specific DM ever,  to keep the defence secure which allowed the great play of Cruyff and co to create their beautiful football.

My thoughts are clear ( but may be wrong) in the early part of a management it is better to win 1-0 than to lose 4-3 we know to our cost in here after a defeat that we are in a points and results driven world, and if you gave any poster in here the chance to win the league with functional football which may not be so pleasing on the eye or look good in opta passing stats, they  would take it every time, We did with a couple of Uncle Bob's teams and delighted to do so. For me what Rodgers has done this season might be too much and too soon, i think he should have played safe got the results , got the fans onside and look to move on to what he wants next season with a much better foundation for the team and himself with the fans, for that i admire his bravery to stick to his guns, but maybe too brave too soon.
As you say the summer signings especially for me in defence and CM will be the make or break time for us and how quickly they settle this maybe a reason Williams is often quoted and even though he is Welsh not my preferred choice out of the current list of possibilities but he would plug a gap.

[Aristotle]

Don't be surprised to see Carra announced as defensive coach in the summer. And whatever your view of the lad is, he can organise a defence

Just give him a yelling horn and plant him in the seats behind the goal. We'll be golden

[Sangria]

My thoughts are clear ( but may be wrong) in the early part of a management it is better to win 1-0 than to lose 4-3 we know to our cost in here after a defeat that we are in a points and results driven world, and if you gave any poster in here the chance to win the league with functional football which may not be so pleasing on the eye or look good in opta passing stats, they  would take it every time, We did with a couple of Uncle Bob's teams and delighted to do so.

Exiledinyorkshire begs to differ.

Something i said over and over again towards the end of Rafas reign and although it was a wee bit disloyal to him, i still stand by it was this. If we are to play football never being able to complete the Rafa project, never quite getting him what he wants in the positions that he needs to finish the job, then please can we play some football in the mean time thats easy on the eye.

[Vulmea]

I know what you're saying, and I don't disagree, but how did it work for us last season, though? We built everything on a strong defence, and only scored 47 goals. Similarly, how did it work for us under Hodgson? The man's entire career has been built on "Defence-First" coaching. I just think it's a historical cliche to "build from the back first". It really doesn't matter how you build, as long as you build. You can get the defence right and not score enough goals and still be mid-table or lower. Or you can get the attack right and neglect the defence, and be Spurs under Ardiles (I was going to use Newcastle under Keegan as an example but I think their biggest problem was Keegan himself - losing composure and selling your best forward to a rival is not the way to develop confidence in the players. Phillipe Albert was a good signing from them, and they should have won something for the football they played). As much as I wanted to wait and see what Kenny did with the attack this season, I also want to wait and see what Rodgers does with the defence next season. If he makes one or two shrewd signings, then next season will see the City (x2), Arsenal, Everton and West Brom (home) games possible show different results - all other things being equal, that could be 11 extra points already, putting us right into the top four mix.

If you're given time, then it doesn't matter how you start your building. Building from the attack and scoring a lot of goals will give you as much confidence that you can win games as building from the back and conceding few. It doesn't matter which way you start - if you can prove to your players that you can get one side of the game right, they will have confidence that you might get the other side right. Again, though, we won't know until the next transfer window and the next season if Rodgers can identify good technical defenders that can hit the ground running. He can afford to take the hit on a forward or two (Borini, Assaidi) because last season our attack wasn't great, so any improvement, however small, is noticeable. On the other hand, whoever he buys in defence has to fulfill the promise of his vision straight away. If he gets it wrong, then it will play a big part in his future at the club. Ajax always built from the front, even in their recruitment to their academy. They played the attacking possession football before they got known internationally for it, but it wasn't until Vasovic was bought that they started to have real success (and he would have told everyone it was largely down to him ). By that time, though, they already had Cruyff, Groot and Swart.  They went from scoring 52 goals under Buckingham to scoring 79 goals and then 102 goals the season after that. So there is a precedent for what Rodgers is trying to do and his way of working - and I think it's rooted more in Ajax than it is in Barcelona.

On what basis are you saying it was a policy to build from the front first rather than lucky happenstance? perhaps the right players at the right price just have not been available. iF Kompany had been available and still playing at Hamburg would we have snapped him up, if Baines had been at Wigan and a bargain would we have grabbed him?

at the end of last season the defence looked reasonably solid - Agger and Skrtel were thought as good as anything in the Prem - the illuminati on here had been screaming for them for three years given Carra's steady decline - BR's philosophy is agnostic on the subject though isn't it? He needs all areas of his team functioning. Is he really building from the front or getting what pieces he can, when he can and at optimum cost. He gave Skrtel a new contract in the summer didn't he? Does that count as building?

Dont buy it myself but your opinion as always gives pause for thought.

In terms of the see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil approach to BR's management again it strikes me as daft - when we win the lads a tactical genius and his philosophy heaven sent - winnning heavily is down to him, we lose and the players let him down..... really that black and white eh? We need to be a bit more grown up, the lads going to make mistakes better recognising them, so we can see if he's addresiong them than pretending they dont exist and it'll all work when he gets the right players.

If Gerrard and Johnson are so predictably complacent then why hasn't the manager who spends all week with them predicted it? Thats as much of his job as telling them what position to play isn't it? If Gerrard is strolling through the game wheres the hook and Henderson's puppy like enthusiasm unchained?

Thankfully BR knows more about football than me, a lot of you know more than me as well, it really isn't hard - doesn't mean you can't get it wrong as saturday and this thread show.