Topic: RAWK Round Table. AFC 2-0 LFC

[ar66]

For the record, I'm an Arsenal fan.

I honestly think the formation cost you guys the game. Sturridge had to be put out wide in midfield, having two players up front leaves the midfield with a lot of running to do. If Rodgers packed the midfield and organized them for when they don't have the ball, it could have been a difficult night for Arsenal. The midfielders and for that matter the defenders were a little all over the place at times for Liverpool. Perhaps Rodgers could have changed it at half time, who knows why he didn't. This game did have an air of the Napoli game, in fact the first goal is almost identical to the goal we scored against Napoli. A cross from the right wing met with a strike from an advanced midfielder.

Overall, I think it might have ended up as a draw, especially if Henderson didn't fluff his chance. I was nervous right towards the end because I thought Liverpool would throw the kitchen sink at it, but their attack looked a little flat. I didn't really expect that from Liverpool.

Anyway, I hope you guys achieve CL football and us as well, it's a good thing the Spurs scum drew on the same weekend so I don't think Liverpool have too much to worry about. I expect and hope that we both finish top 4 and are in the running for the title.

On another note, I think I'm one of the very few Arsenal fans that are still frustrated with Ramsey. But this is not the place to discuss that haha.

[Twelfth Man]

For the record, I'm an Arsenal fan.

I honestly think the formation cost you guys the game. Sturridge had to be put out wide in midfield, having two players up front leaves the midfield with a lot of running to do. If Rodgers packed the midfield and organized them for when they don't have the ball, it could have been a difficult night for Arsenal. The midfielders and for that matter the defenders were a little all over the place at times for Liverpool. Perhaps Rodgers could have changed it at half time, who knows why he didn't. This game did have an air of the Napoli game, in fact the first goal is almost identical to the goal we scored against Napoli. A cross from the right wing met with a strike from an advanced midfielder.

Overall, I think it might have ended up as a draw, especially if Henderson didn't fluff his chance. I was nervous right towards the end because I thought Liverpool would throw the kitchen sink at it, but their attack looked a little flat. I didn't really expect that from Liverpool.

Anyway, I hope you guys achieve CL football and us as well, it's a good thing the Spurs scum drew on the same weekend so I don't think Liverpool have too much to worry about. I expect and hope that we both finish top 4 and are in the running for the title.

On another note, I think I'm one of the very few Arsenal fans that are still frustrated with Ramsey. But this is not the place to discuss that haha.

Cheers mate, nice to get a view from the other side.

[Groundskeeper Willie]

Thanks PoP, that post reinforces what I think about the problems we have in CM.

In your opinion, how and where should Gerrard be used? I don´t think he´s got the positional sense to play where he does now. Or he must get better to pick his forward runs so he´s not left out of position when we lose the ball. The not tracking back part when he DOES get caught out, I don´t want to talk about.

Also, about Lucas' role/performances; do you think he struggles because Gerrard - in my view- is hard to play alongside considering he likes to go forward and gets too much to do, or is the problem with himself?

[Groundskeeper Willie]

If you're playing players on merit, then the best 11 can't start - it's the 11 who are performing. This loss to Arsenal might facilitate a change, and the last major change was, of course, when we lost to Southampton. So Rodgers is being very consistent in what's he's doing. If any player wants to claim a spot, then he has to outperform the player he's looking to replace. As "calm and assured" as Alberto might have been when he played, he didn't outperform any of the players he might be looking to replace. Same for Cissokho. As soon as Enrique is fit, if Cissokho doesn't meet the standard, he'll lose his spot. I agree that Lucas and Gerrard have been less than perfect, but nobody has come in and stamped their name on the midfield to replace them, and that's what it's going to take. On the other hand, if we buy one or two strong midfielders in January, the writing will be on the wall for one or both of them, I think.

Catch 22 is it not? How can you stamp your name on the midfield when you don´t get a look in? Someone has to get a chance sooner or later. Injuries or fatigue or whatever will force Rodgers to change things. Wouldn´t it be beneficial to have a couple of others have some game time under their belt, when they´re asked to go full time? I don´t particularly relish the fact of having to replace an injured Gerrard with an Allen or Alberto with only a handful of minutes of game time during the season.

[Groundskeeper Willie]

I did a review for The Anfield Index if anyone's interested http://anfieldindex.com/5929/arsenal-2-0-liverpool-detailed-review.html

Good read. Your piece coupled with PoP's analysis, lead me to believe that Lucas, to use your own words, has to overcompensate quite often during games due to his partners in CM. He´s left with too much to do and is left looking worse for it.

 I´ve been thinking this for a while, but not being able to decide. Your thoughts?

[rossipersempre]

Catch 22 is it not? How can you stamp your name on the midfield when you don´t get a look in?

Exactly. It's the flip side of the equally illogical claim - routinely trotted out for Coates last year - that you can't risk playing certain youngsters until they've reached a certain (and unquantified) level of experience.

[fefs]

http://www.zonalmarking.net/2013/11/04/arsenal-2-0-liverpool-arsenal-get-the-better-of-both-of-rodgers-systems/

Zonal markings analysis of the game is always a good read.

Interesting to see Coutinho only got one pass into the box, and that Suarez was so ineffective with his dribbling

[Timbo's Goals]

http://www.zonalmarking.net/2013/11/04/arsenal-2-0-liverpool-arsenal-get-the-better-of-both-of-rodgers-systems/


Interesting to see Coutinho only got one pass into the box

Is that one successful pass as I'm sure there were more than a few marginally overhit or misdirected ones?

[TSC]

For the record, I'm an Arsenal fan.

I honestly think the formation cost you guys the game. Sturridge had to be put out wide in midfield, having two players up front leaves the midfield with a lot of running to do. If Rodgers packed the midfield and organized them for when they don't have the ball, it could have been a difficult night for Arsenal. The midfielders and for that matter the defenders were a little all over the place at times for Liverpool. Perhaps Rodgers could have changed it at half time, who knows why he didn't. This game did have an air of the Napoli game, in fact the first goal is almost identical to the goal we scored against Napoli. A cross from the right wing met with a strike from an advanced midfielder.

Overall, I think it might have ended up as a draw, especially if Henderson didn't fluff his chance. I was nervous right towards the end because I thought Liverpool would throw the kitchen sink at it, but their attack looked a little flat. I didn't really expect that from Liverpool.

Anyway, I hope you guys achieve CL football and us as well, it's a good thing the Spurs scum drew on the same weekend so I don't think Liverpool have too much to worry about. I expect and hope that we both finish top 4 and are in the running for the title.

On another note, I think I'm one of the very few Arsenal fans that are still frustrated with Ramsey. But this is not the place to discuss that haha.

Yep similar to how I saw it.  The problem was all to do with the formation.  Ok within that you had quite a few wasted chances, but still the formation played into Arsenal's hands, gifting them numbers and possession through midfield.  Rodgers changed it eventually and it was interesting to see how we started to look dangerous and created quite a few chances once he did.  If we'd started off like that I think it would have been a different game.

[Timbo's Goals]

Yep similar to how I saw it.  The problem was all to do with the formation.  Ok within that you had quite a few wasted chances, but still the formation played into Arsenal's hands, gifting them numbers and possession through midfield.  Rodgers changed it eventually and it was interesting to see how we started to look dangerous and created quite a few chances once he did.  If we'd started off like that I think it would have been a different game.

It was reactive as distinct from proactive management. The point I was trying to make a few pages back is that the various Liverpool management teams we all still cherish so dearly would have never allowed such a tactical mismatch in the first place.

When we were lording it they invariably did let the opposition worry about us. However, when things were not quite so predictable they would hedge their bets and in the first instance ensure we at least held our own. My favourite ever was the deployment of Ian Ross at goodison to snuff out Alan Ball. Every red around us in Goodsison Road couldn't believe the selection of Ross by shanks. But he knew a million times better than us. Ross never gave him a kick. Everton were like a ship without a rudder. I think it was the game where Bobby Graham got a hat trick with three breakaways. VBG may correct me.

 

Brendan and his management team have got to aim to attain that sort of level where their main ploy is one step ahead or at least at parity with a top class opponent . We cannot have it like on Saturday evening where we're trying to rejig the main ploy once the wheels have started to come off.

I know that may seem harsh and i know it's still early days for Brendan but this is a crucial season. He's got shall we say a dozen major league games to face in which the margins will be so tight. We cannot be going into them with one arm behind our back. He and his management cannot afford another cock up like his 3-5-2 against Arsenal. In every one of those games he has to give us the best possible chance of either grabbing all three points or drawing and denying the opposition the three points. He didn't do that on saturday night and he simply has to learn double quick from that if we're to reach that top four placing.

Horses for courses.
 

[steveeastend]

Sends out the wrong message for me especially because Agger has been relegated to the bench and can't play due to others being "in-form". We may of been winning but the central midfield has been poor in the majority of games.

While I basically agree with your overall opinion I would say that politics/hierachy have always been a major part in top level football and ignoring this would be not good for the performances as well. Benching Gerrard is not easy unless it´s Kenny as a manager or some other big name and for Rodgers it could backfire that badly that it could ruin his work with the squad so far. Unless you have a VERY good reason to do so, like an injury, some public statement or a massive downwards spiral in our performances, you won´t do that.

In terms of Lucas I don´t see a better option around though. Allen and Henderson were not able to replace him and with either of them besides Gerrard, Arsenal would have killed us.

[Acapulco]

Was playing Flanagan, who's with good reason not had a sniff of the first team in 18 months, more of a risk than putting in a recovering Kelly? Yes, his WBA performance was shocking by all accounts, but in the absence of other options (and a midweek runout), getting him back in the saddle would surely take precedence over giving another Spearing-level "great attitude" player a rare memory to tell his grandkids about. Not that it would have made much difference to the outcome but still.


I would have played Flanno in front of Kelly. Sadly Kelly is just not anywhere near his best at the moment. I have watched him in U21 games and frankly would rather see McLaughlin in there.He has more chance than Flanno or Kelly on current form.

[Acapulco]

Good read. Your piece coupled with PoP's analysis, lead me to believe that Lucas, to use your own words, has to overcompensate quite often during games due to his partners in CM. He´s left with too much to do and is left looking worse for it.

 I´ve been thinking this for a while, but not being able to decide. Your thoughts?

Cannot agree with this. Lucas lack of pace is at least as big a problem as Gerrards. The fact is neither are good enough on current form so we only have Hendo who's skills are questionable but at least he will work harder than the other simply because he is fitter.
Incredibly we have managed to hold onto joint 2nd despite our awful MF.

[Lovely Man]

Hi, long-time lurker and the Arsenal game has finally made me take the plunge!

Not sure how qualified I am to pass judgement at this hallowed table, but if you'll indulge me for two minutes I'll make a fist of it:

We have to play with wingbacks because, with the best will in the world, our wingbacks are more of an attacking threat than our wide midfield/wing options.  So I believe Rodgers was right to stick with the 352, or however else you want to describe the formation.

I felt sorry for Lucas because he was being swamped by Arsenal midfielders breaking past Gerrard and Henderson.  If you look at the opta stats for the average position of each player in that game, you'll see that Henderson and Gerrard were very much playing ahead of Lucas.

I felt Mignolet could perhaps have done more with both goals.  I don't want to be overly critical of the lad because I'm a big admirer of him, I think he's a great goalkeeper.  However, he was probably on the deck for half a second too long after the Cazorla header, and the Ramsey effort seemed to go over him.

My opinion of Suarez and Sturridge is that, against good opposition, they shouldn't start games together.  For one, I think it gives us a problem in that our bench looks poor and so the opposition don't have the worry about what happens if we change things.  And for two, it would have given us an extra body in the middle to counter the Arsenal midfield, someone like Coutinho or Allen could have been tasked with harassing Arteta.

All in all, I was more disappointed with our performance than impressed with Arsenal's performance.  I felt the conditions didn't help either team and made for a poor spectacle.

[Lenin.]

Cannot agree with this. Lucas lack of pace is at least as big a problem as Gerrards. The fact is neither are good enough on current form so we only have Hendo who's skills are questionable but at least he will work harder than the other simply because he is fitter.
Incredibly we have managed to hold onto joint 2nd despite our awful MF.

No, it's not.

[Alf Garnett!]

Let me be the first to congratulate you on gaining a first in Hindsight.


I hope you enjoy your future years as a scribe and writer on RAWK.

Bellend.

[Gnurglan]

I know that may seem harsh and i know it's still early days for Brendan but this is a crucial season. He's got shall we say a dozen major league games to face in which the margins will be so tight. We cannot be going into them with one arm behind our back. He and his management cannot afford another cock up like his 3-5-2 against Arsenal. In every one of those games he has to give us the best possible chance of either grabbing all three points or drawing and denying the opposition the three points. He didn't do that on saturday night and he simply has to learn double quick from that if we're to reach that top four placing.

Horses for courses.
 

Two things.
1) I am not so sure we have as many horses as we'd like. This is what I meant earlier with our two strikers. Remove one and we have to change formation. When both are available, we're forced to play the 1-2 up front. It's difficult to optimize our team for a formation that we can stick with. I believe Rodgers has actually a fairly limited number of options available to him, with the keys being Lucas, Sturridge and Suarez.

2) We've still done well so far this season. We're on track for a top four finish. I think we can pay the price (defeat vs Arsenal away), as long as we beat the sides we have to beat (Fulham, Norwich, West Ham,...). I see the Arsenal game as an indicator of what we have to address, but that's about it. There's no reason for alarm bells as long as we can do the fundamental job, which is to beat the bottom half sides home and away.

[Lovely Man]

Gerrard's lack of pace/mobility is indeed very worrying, but I think his lack of game intelligence in the middle of the park is even more of a problem.

He committed to challenges that he didn't need to, same as Henderson. 

I've got massive, massive issues with the Gerrard/Henderson combo, I've seen so very, very little to suggest that it's working, and can work, especially as the clock is ticking on Gerrard physically, so is there any point in continuing this experiment? 

If we're going to have a midfield that doesn't quite work, then I'd rather it was young (Allen/Alberto) so that there is at least an outside chance of it developing into something worthwhile in the next 12 months.  As it stands, we have a solid (ish) defence and a great attack, so that will keep us buoyant in the meantime, but it's painfully obvious that this Gerrard/Henderson thing is never going to suddenly 'click' into a top class combination, so why prolong the pain?

[steveeastend]

What did Henderson, with his undeniably great engine do for Arsenal's first goal? It's all fine and good pointing to Gerrard who's the farthest away to begin with, and to Lucas who's the most withdrawn and ends up not doing much positively. But where's Henderson? Did he cover Ramsey or Cazorla? Did he end up covering Arteta after he had released the ball to Sagnia? How was the ball lost to begin with such that it ended up with Arteta?

Henderson couldn´t cover for Gerrard when Lucas was out as he just doesn´t know how to create triangles in defending as the first and most important thing to do. He gets frustrated in every game chasing the man or the ball or both but should cover the space BEFORE a ball gets there instead. It´s called talent, you can´t learn that, no chance.

[Gnurglan]

Henderson couldn´t cover for Gerrard when Lucas was out as he just doesn´t know how to create triangles in defending as the first and morst important duty. He gets frustrated in every game chasing the man or the ball or both but should cover the space BEFORE a ball gets there instead. It´s called talent, you can´t learn that, no chance.

I think he could learn it. You restrict his duties. Force him to run less. Tell him to simply hold his position and protect the CBs in a defensive midfield role.

Henderson has been shipped to new positions so much that he's capable of taking instructions and changing his game accordingly. The way see it, Henderson is rather given too much freedom or too many duties when in CM. Which is why I think he's able to cope so well when played at RB (where he's more restricted in his role).

[steveeastend]

I think he could learn it. You restrict his duties. Force him to run less. Tell him to simply hold his position and protect the CBs in a defensive midfield role.

Henderson has been shipped to new positions so much that he's capable of taking instructions and changing his game accordingly. The way see it, Henderson is rather given too much freedom or too many duties when in CM. Which is why I think he's able to cope so well when played at RB (where he's more restricted in his role).

Is he really? (shipped to too many positions). Coutinho could do it with ease, and Moses wasn´t bad either when playing in different positions. The last couple of games have been his chance, you won´t get a better one. Lucas out against mid and bottom table teams to show some of his runs to be valuable and then Arsenal where he could have proved to be valuable in closing down gaps and making it narrow in defending... the outcome was pretty lame..

[PhaseOfPlay]

Catch 22 is it not? How can you stamp your name on the midfield when you don´t get a look in? Someone has to get a chance sooner or later. Injuries or fatigue or whatever will force Rodgers to change things. Wouldn´t it be beneficial to have a couple of others have some game time under their belt, when they´re asked to go full time? I don´t particularly relish the fact of having to replace an injured Gerrard with an Allen or Alberto with only a handful of minutes of game time during the season.

Alberto played in two games where he got more than enough minutes to show something a bit special, and he didn't. In order to displace a Lucas or a Gerrard, you can't go onto the field and do "alright". You have to take the game by the scruff of the neck, bend it according to your own will, and make the manager pick you in the next available game. That is, unfortunately for Alberto, what you have to do to get in ahead of the club captain, as well as the mainstay holding midfielder. So again, it doesn't matter if you get 5 minutes or 5 games - you have to make your mark. Same for Allen - although he is at least excused somewhat because he has been returning from injury and so has a different physical level. But the same situation remains - you can't be put on the field, play your ordinary game, and then expect to be rotated in. You have to make the manager pick you, and that means scoring more than one goal, making more than one assist, making numerous key passes, or physically dominating your direct opponent on defence, if you're a defender. Look at Alberto's passes for his 25 minutes in the Palace game - a game we dominated, were in total control of, and where the platform for making your mark couldn't have been easier (from Squawka.com):



Only one pass in that selection could be considered a successful penetration pass. So while technically Alberto had a tidy performance, and one that shows that he is an assured, skilful player - it wouldn't be enough to make any manager say "Yes - I must put that player in for Gerrard or Lucas". He also didn't make a single tackle in that period either, so he couldn't even challenge Lucas for a central midfield spot on a defensive basis. So while we all know he has quality, it's clear that he hasn't done ENOUGH to warrant displacing the club captain and de facto holding midfielder. Same goes for his 28 minutes against Newcastle - a game in which he definitely had the platform to show that he can be a game-changer. Here are his passes:



Again, nothing that really makes a manager sit down and think "How the hell do I get this guy into the team from the start?" It's okay being tidy and technical - it is a desirable thing, certainly. But that's for the purists. for the manager, who needs results as well as performances, any player staking a claim to a position has to offer something better than their ordinary game that he sees in training every day. Compare that with Coutinho, who has been a hub of activity since he arrived. That's the difference. Get on the pitch, and make things happen, and Rodgers - and indeed, most managers - will find a starting spot for you. Get on the pitch and do your day-to-day stuff that he sees in training, and then it's not really going to make him change his mind about Gerrard or Lucas. It's much the same thing for Aspas, for example. He can't get on the pitch and make nice runs and pressure well - that won't displace Suarez or Sturridge. But if one of those fail to score in a game, and Aspas gets a hat-trick in one game, a goal in another, and 2 goals in the next, all over the space of some second half sub minutes - you can be damn sure that Rodgers will be putting Aspas in as a starter for the next game. That's how it goes. It's not about Rodgers "not giving players chances" - he gives more than enough. It's about the players themselves doing something extraordinary with their time on the field - enough to make the manager think they would be a better option than Gerrard or Lucas or Coutinho or whoever. So far, neither Alberto nor Allen have done that, for whatever reason.

[Gnurglan]

Is he really? (shipped to too many positions). Coutinho could do it with ease, and Moses wasn´t bad either when playing in different positions. The last couple of games have been his chance, you won´t get a better one. Lucas out against mid and bottom table teams to show some of his runs to be valuable and then Arsenal where he could have proved to be valuable in closing down gaps and making it narrow in defending... the outcome was pretty lame..

To be fair to Henderson, I think he's shown a good development under Rodgers. I like that about him, the positive progress. It's quite interesting that when we subbed Flanagan vs Arsenal to bring on Moses, we decided Henderson should go RB. Not Kelly. We saw Henderson as important enough to keep on the field, in a new position. So we have Henderson shift between CM and RB and we've seen him in attacking midfield before. That's a lot to ask. We have CMs, we have RBs, but it's Henderson we pick for some reason. Faith?

If we want to make it narrow in defence, then I reckon we need to become more compact as a team. Perhaps drop deeper, so we have the game in front of us when we start defending. And we may have to include Sturridge and Suarez in that too. So I think some of it is down to for example Henderson, the individual, but I also believe a lot has to do with how we're set out to play in defence.

[Timbo's Goals]

.... It's about the players themselves doing something extraordinary with their time on the field - enough to make the manager think they would be a better option than Gerrard or Lucas or Coutinho or whoever. So far, neither Alberto nor Allen have done that, for whatever reason.

I think they're good points PoP.

Also Rodgers and his team see them every day in training. If they showed anything special it would surely entice Rodgers to give them a go. Sahko seems to have made such an impact in training from the word go. Toure ditto on the pitch in the pre-season games.

[TSC]

Alberto played in two games where he got more than enough minutes to show something a bit special, and he didn't. In order to displace a Lucas or a Gerrard, you can't go onto the field and do "alright". You have to take the game by the scruff of the neck, bend it according to your own will, and make the manager pick you in the next available game. That is, unfortunately for Alberto, what you have to do to get in ahead of the club captain, as well as the mainstay holding midfielder. So again, it doesn't matter if you get 5 minutes or 5 games - you have to make your mark. Same for Allen - although he is at least excused somewhat because he has been returning from injury and so has a different physical level. But the same situation remains - you can't be put on the field, play your ordinary game, and then expect to be rotated in. You have to make the manager pick you

Yep, and this was the frustration with Shelvey too thinking back on it -  got periodic run outs.  He failed to do anything of sufficient note despite being given quite a few appearances, either starting or off the bench. 

[wah00ey]

No, it's not.

Yes it is - I think the lack of "legs" in the pair of them is what causes us problems when we're exposed to a midfield such as Arsenal's.  Gerrard's declining pace would not be exposed as much if Lucas was quicker and vice versa.  The problem relates to them playing together as a pair, not necessarily as individuals if they had other quicker players alongside them.

I'd be interested to hear why you think it's not a problem - particularly as this thread is supposed to be one for informed debate as opposed to one-liners...

[TSC]

To be fair to Henderson, I think he's shown a good development under Rodgers. I like that about him, the positive progress. It's quite interesting that when we subbed Flanagan vs Arsenal to bring on Moses, we decided Henderson should go RB. Not Kelly. We saw Henderson as important enough to keep on the field, in a new position. So we have Henderson shift between CM and RB and we've seen him in attacking midfield before. That's a lot to ask. We have CMs, we have RBs, but it's Henderson we pick for some reason. Faith?

If we want to make it narrow in defence, then I reckon we need to become more compact as a team. Perhaps drop deeper, so we have the game in front of us when we start defending. And we may have to include Sturridge and Suarez in that too. So I think some of it is down to for example Henderson, the individual, but I also believe a lot has to do with how we're set out to play in defence.

I'd agree Henderson has developed under Rodgers.  However whether he's going to figure long term remains to be seen.  If you're being honest can you really see him being a key part of a midfield that challenges for the title for example?  I don't know if he's lacking technically or whether at times he's afraid of 'failure'.  But when he gets into key positions for example he seems to 'freeze' or lack the technical ability.  I'm not just talking about the Arsenal chances, but on a few occasions this season when he's had albeit half chances on the edge of the area he's been poor technically with the finishing and often simply lobbed the chances into the crowd.

[stockdam]

For the record, I'm an Arsenal fan.

Welcome as it's nice to hear from another viewpoint.

I watched the game again and it was tighter than I first thought. Yes Arsenal had the edge and were more mobile but we had a couple of chances and if it had gone to 1-1 then I think the game would have ended that way.

I do agree that we made a mistake in the initial formation, well the formation was ok but the players available weren't suitable.

PoP did say above that you should play your own game and let the other team worry about your strengths. That's fine if you have the players, but the first thing that we should have done was to nullify a very quick passing Arsenal midfield. We gave Arsenal too much time on the ball and we didn't have anyone at times between our deep defence and the two strikers.

Hindsight is a great thing but in future I would only play Sturridge or Suarez against a team with a good midfield. Then when the players tire, I would swap them over.

Games like this teach a good manager what works and what doesn't. Sometimes learning what doesn't work is a good lesson.

[Timbo's Goals]

Two things.
1) I am not so sure we have as many horses as we'd like. This is what I meant earlier with our two strikers. Remove one and we have to change formation. When both are available, we're forced to play the 1-2 up front. It's difficult to optimize our team for a formation that we can stick with. I believe Rodgers has actually a fairly limited number of options available to him, with the keys being Lucas, Sturridge and Suarez.

2) We've still done well so far this season. We're on track for a top four finish. I think we can pay the price (defeat vs Arsenal away), as long as we beat the sides we have to beat (Fulham, Norwich, West Ham,...). I see the Arsenal game as an indicator of what we have to address, but that's about it. There's no reason for alarm bells as long as we can do the fundamental job, which is to beat the bottom half sides home and away.

I'd agree with both points G.

That said, we cannot ignore the fact that a third [11 games] of our remaining games are against the rivals for the top positions. All I'm saying is that in those games we cannot afford to concede any margin to the opposition in the form of the sort of managerial selection/tactical approach inadequacies we witnessed at the Emirates. Nothing is guaranteed but by their selections/tactical approach Brendan and his management team simply have to give us the best possible chance in each of those games.

Hopefully we won't be faced with any more of the sort of glaring tactical/selection headache brendan had for the Arsenal game with both his key players for the sytem missing but each game will have its own decisions to be made which though perhpas only seeming to be marginal can affect the outcome.

Merely my own opinion but to throw in just two selection/tactical considerations which I feel if addressed would fall into the category I'm talking about for such big games:

First, can the management honestly keep selecting a back line shorn of its most complete footballer, one who is infinitely more comfortable on the ball than the other three encumbants and if given license to do so can actually supplement our midfield/attacking play infinitely better than the current three? Yes, Agger has made errors this season - but who the fuck hasn't? Was Danny's shite challenge for the Soton free header any more damaging than Kolo's ducking Ramsey's shot. Yes the other three have each done reasonably well defensively but so had Agger for the most part.

Second, can we afford a repeat in the remaining 'big' games of the sort of *half hearted* central midfield performance from Steven we saw at the Emirates? If Brendan feels he has no choice other than to select Stevie - which as someone pointed out is a fair point given the inevitable 'political' side of things with such an iconic figurehead at the club - then for the 'big' games against quality hard running proper midfield opposition let's have a selection and deployment that best uses Stevie's undoubted talents as distinct from a pretence that with his current approach to league games he is capable of hacking it with the best in that engine room role.

*half-hearted* Just to clarify. I'm sure it is inevitable given Stevie’s situation that Brazil represents the Eldorado of Stevie’s career. Subconsciously no way is he risking life and limb, no way is he not conserving himself with that ultimate goal in mind. Some are saying his legs are gone. Perhaps that is true to an extent at his stage but those legs were certainly not gone for the last minute goal against Poland.   

In order to step up to the plate as I'm sure he's capable of doing, these are the sort of considerations Brendan simply has to address in such games. Against the lesser opposition they are camouflaged. In the big games they can get exposed. As we saw down there against Arsenal.

[Corkboy]

Hi, long-time lurker and the Arsenal game has finally made me take the plunge!

Welcome, Lovely Man.

Wow. That was weird to type.

[Lenin.]

Yes it is - I think the lack of "legs" in the pair of them is what causes us problems when we're exposed to a midfield such as Arsenal's.  Gerrard's declining pace would not be exposed as much if Lucas was quicker and vice versa.  The problem relates to them playing together as a pair, not necessarily as individuals if they had other quicker players alongside them.

I'd be interested to hear why you think it's not a problem - particularly as this thread is supposed to be one for informed debate as opposed to one-liners...

Well apart from the fact our midfield was outnumbered by Arsenals, (ie we got our tactics wrong) Gerrards 'lack of legs' is more of an issue in our midfield than Lucas's perceived lack, imo.  Let Gerrard stay in the oppositions half of the centre circle but stick someone next to Lucas who is prepared to match Lucas's endeavour and we will be ok as far as, midfield 'legs' are concerned. Lucas wasnt the one getting caught upfield and strolling back. He was the one facing 3 Arsenal players at times.

[PhaseOfPlay]

First, can the management honestly keep selecting a back line shorn of its most complete footballer, one who is infinitely more comfortable on the ball than the other three encumbants and if given license to do so can actually supplement our midfield/attacking play infinitely better than the current three? Yes, Agger has made errors this season - but who the fuck hasn't? Was Danny's shite challenge for the Soton free header any more damaging than Kolo's ducking Ramsey's shot. Yes the other three have each done reasonably well defensively but so had Agger for the most part.

I think we'll see the change from Fulham onwards. Rodgers clearly wants to keep as settled a team as possible, but any loss will make him change something to keep things fresh. I think if we stick with a back three versus Fulham, Agger will come in, and probably for Toure, with Skrtel moving across to the right side. If we go to a back four, we might see Sakho and Agger, or Agger and Skrtel with Sakho as left back. I would be surprised if Rodgers DOESN'T change it for this game. I think he's fairly consistent in that respect - as long as things are going well, changes are minimal. If we lose, then something gets examined more closely, and probably altered, too.

[Timbo's Goals]

Games like this teach a good manager what works and what doesn't. Sometimes learning what doesn't work is a good lesson.

 

Agreed as I've been stressing myself. Part of the Liverpool secret down the years was the management anticipating correctly, knowing in advance without hindsight. That's the level of insightfulness we've got to hope brendan and his team are striving for and attain - rather quickly given the somewhat inflated importance of this season.

I just don't want to see another game against top class opposition where we go into it with one hand behind our backs because brendan and his team have called it wrong.

[Gnurglan]

I'd agree Henderson has developed under Rodgers.  However whether he's going to figure long term remains to be seen.  If you're being honest can you really see him being a key part of a midfield that challenges for the title for example?  I don't know if he's lacking technically or whether at times he's afraid of 'failure'.  But when he gets into key positions for example he seems to 'freeze' or lack the technical ability.  I'm not just talking about the Arsenal chances, but on a few occasions this season when he's had albeit half chances on the edge of the area he's been poor technically with the finishing and often simply lobbed the chances into the crowd.

We'll see. Right now I'd say he won't be part of a team that challenges for the title. But I've been wrong before about Henderson (didn't think he could add up goals and assists like he did last season). I respect his progress. Thought he showed a good mentality when things were tough for him, which I also respect. That's something to build on.

For how long will that be enough? Very difficult to say. I reckon we need to buy/sell and form a new CM, one that makes sense. Someone will have to leave and that might be Henderson. It would be a little unfair given his positive development, but our aim is not making Henderson a top player, we're about creating a successful side.

[Timbo's Goals]

I think we'll see the change from Fulham onwards. Rodgers clearly wants to keep as settled a team as possible, but any loss will make him change something to keep things fresh. I think if we stick with a back three versus Fulham, Agger will come in, and probably for Toure, with Skrtel moving across to the right side. If we go to a back four, we might see Sakho and Agger, or Agger and Skrtel with Sakho as left back. I would be surprised if Rodgers DOESN'T change it for this game. I think he's fairly consistent in that respect - as long as things are going well, changes are minimal. If we lose, then something gets examined more closely, and probably altered, too.

I think you're right PoP. I'll be surprised too - and pretty crestfallen - if we don't see our graceful proper footballing comfy on the ball centre back returning on Saturday.

As a young and relatively unproven manager with the expectations and demands upon him there's no doubt Brendan is walking more of a tightrope than most. I personally think he's doing it quite superbly in overall terms and if this season wasn't quite so crucial to our overall progress as a club - which I believe it to be - I wouldn't be so concerned about him getting these things right. But it is what it is and the top four procurement is more crucial for us than for any of the other teams. He and his management team have to get everything right for the team to ensure they go out with a full deck of cards for each big game from here on in. That's all we can ask of him. If that doesn't suffice then so be it. 

[Gnurglan]

I'd agree with both points G.

That said, we cannot ignore the fact that a third [11 games] of our remaining games are against the rivals for the top positions. All I'm saying is that in those games we cannot afford to concede any margin to the opposition in the form of the sort of managerial selection/tactical approach inadequacies we witnessed at the Emirates. Nothing is guaranteed but by their selections/tactical approach Brendan and his management team simply have to give us the best possible chance in each of those games.

Hopefully we won't be faced with any more of the sort of glaring tactical/selection headache brendan had for the Arsenal game with both his key players for the sytem missing but each game will have its own decisions to be made which though perhpas only seeming to be marginal can affect the outcome.

Merely my own opinion but to throw in just two selection/tactical considerations which I feel if addressed would fall into the category I'm talking about for such big games:

First, can the management honestly keep selecting a back line shorn of its most complete footballer, one who is infinitely more comfortable on the ball than the other three encumbants and if given license to do so can actually supplement our midfield/attacking play infinitely better than the current three? Yes, Agger has made errors this season - but who the fuck hasn't? Was Danny's shite challenge for the Soton free header any more damaging than Kolo's ducking Ramsey's shot. Yes the other three have each done reasonably well defensively but so had Agger for the most part.

Second, can we afford a repeat in the remaining 'big' games of the sort of *half hearted* central midfield performance from Steven we saw at the Emirates? If Brendan feels he has no choice other than to select Stevie - which as someone pointed out is a fair point given the inevitable 'political' side of things with such an iconic figurehead at the club - then for the 'big' games against quality hard running proper midfield opposition let's have a selection and deployment that best uses Stevie's undoubted talents as distinct from a pretence that with his current approach to league games he is capable of hacking it with the best in that engine room role.

*half-hearted* Just to clarify. I'm sure it is inevitable given Stevie’s situation that Brazil represents the Eldorado of Stevie’s career. Subconsciously no way is he risking life and limb, no way is he not conserving himself with that ultimate goal in mind. Some are saying his legs are gone. Perhaps that is true to an extent at his stage but those legs were certainly not gone for the last minute goal against Poland.   

In order to step up to the plate as I'm sure he's capable of doing, these are the sort of considerations Brendan simply has to address in such games. Against the lesser opposition they are camouflaged. In the big games they can get exposed. As we saw down there against Arsenal.

We will of course have to try and win against the better sides as well. We can't surrender points by default. Just saying if we can do the job we need to do, that could still be enough to take us to top four.

About Agger, I wonder if we're not overstating his value to the team. We like his style and his forward runs, but don't we get the same runs from Toure? And don't we get a stronger physical presence with Sakho? Have we really missed Agger that much lately?

About Gerrard, I'm undecided. He still has enough qualities to be a matchwinner. He's a great bonus to have in the side. But if I look ahead, it's obvious that we need to plan for a future without him as a key player. At some point we need to actively promote another player and phase Gerrard out. The question is when. Now? I feel we try and use him as much as possible. He's changed his role in the last couple of years and in return we've used him more minutes. And I wonder if we shouldn't do the opposite. Decide this is his role and then see if/when/how he fits in.

But someone has to "take" his role as well. Force himself into the side, ahead of Gerrard, on merit. And we haven't seen that. So Rodgers is not getting the answers he's searching for. Which, IMO means that the competition isn't good enough. Perhaps the right thing to do then is to keep Gerrard and replace his competitors? Perhaps the real weakness isn't Gerrard, but that he's still the best option we have (and the others aren't good enough)?

[ar66]

Cheers mate, nice to get a view from the other side.

Cheers.

If we'd started off like that I think it would have been a different game.

I'm sure of it yeah. Sturridge or Suarez could also have done better with some hold up play, could have helped to bring sustained pressure which Liverpool lacked slightly until towards the end.

Welcome as it's nice to hear from another viewpoint.

Cheers mate.

Hindsight is a great thing but in future I would only play Sturridge or Suarez against a team with a good midfield. Then when the players tire, I would swap them over.

Sounds like a decent plan going forward. It's interesting how well both of them played at Old Trafford in the Capital One Cup. But then again, your midfield dominated that day so they saw a lot of the ball.

[JTK]

Which, IMO means that the competition isn't good enough. Perhaps the right thing to do then is to keep Gerrard and replace his competitors? Perhaps the real weakness isn't Gerrard, but that he's still the best option we have (and the others aren't good enough)?

The best way to improve depth & competition in the squad is to buy players to improve on the regular starters though, not to buy players as back up. Then the competition is the players who were our first choice.

For example, we should have bought a player who we thought was better than Enrique, not bought a player who could 'compete' with him but not really offer anything extra.

[robgomm]

I think he's fairly consistent in that respect - as long as things are going well, changes are minimal. If we lose, then something gets examined more closely, and probably altered, too.

Hmm, that's interesting. Things are going well generally but those issues that he might change for Fulham were there before Arsenal. I think I'd rather he be proactive than reactive about it.

[steveeastend]

Alberto played in two games where he got more than enough minutes to show something a bit special, and he didn't. In order to displace a Lucas or a Gerrard, you can't go onto the field and do "alright". You have to take the game by the scruff of the neck, bend it according to your own will, and make the manager pick you in the next available game. That is, unfortunately for Alberto, what you have to do to get in ahead of the club captain, as well as the mainstay holding midfielder. So again, it doesn't matter if you get 5 minutes or 5 games - you have to make your mark. Same for Allen - although he is at least excused somewhat because he has been returning from injury and so has a different physical level.


Again, nothing that really makes a manager sit down and think "How the hell do I get this guy into the team from the start?" It's okay being tidy and technical - it is a desirable thing, certainly. But that's for the purists. for the manager, who needs results as well as performances, any player staking a claim to a position has to offer something better than their ordinary game that he sees in training every day.

I overall strongly agree but on the other hand some players have been given countless opportunities, Henderson, Allen or Shelvey f.e. whereas others where dropped immediately like Sahin and some others during the last couple of years we bought for midfield f.e.

I think it´s impossible here to ignore politics within a squad/club, it´s part of the nature of the game.