Liverpool FC Forum

[andy_g]

Ambition (too me) would be playing this..Im not gonna show the defence becuase thats nothing to do with going for it,or ambition!

           Gerrard   Masherano   Alonso  Riera

                       Keane     Torres

I'd beg Rafa if I ever met the man to play this!
I want that team picked and stuck with as soon as Nando is back,

Absolutely 100% agree with every word of that post.

me too

and me

i don't.

the defence is important as well - or at least the part of it commonly known as full backs. use the ones that know how to push on and create a genuine threat on the overlap and we'd be even more rocking.

the lovely goal that arbeloa scored not long ago. do people think that that was a once in a career achievement or do you think he has the ability to do it more often given the chance?

[maypaxvobiscum]

we're still top!

[Emerald Red]

Chelsea lack ambition. It's official!

[Madmax]

Chelsea lack ambition. It's official!

[stapo1000]

Turned into a good thread in the end this one. Copped a bit of abuse, the old means of earning a living reared it's head, my attitude f.ucking stank and all that but there you go. We did a bit a twoing and frowing about the definition of "ambition", and about the "willingness to lose" thing, and there were a couple of "I can't believe we're even talking about this's given we've done this or that"s, but between and betwixt all of that there were some good points.

For my part, perhaps "adventure" would probably have been a better word as someone suggested, equally it might have been better to talk of "willingness to RISK losing". "Ambition" though is the term which is always used in the last twenty minutes of football matches, "do such and such have the ambition to go on and win it etc etc". What commentators and pundits mean when they say this is are they prepared to really go for it, to sling men forward, to press the game, to push the fullbacks on, to leave strikers on, to possibly increase the number of strikers. That's what I meant too, although it is correct to point out that grammatically it doesn't really stack up. Most people got it though and it was a decent discussion.

To briefly go back to it (the discussion part), I worry about this tendency to bring Keane off all the time. I think most people would agree that he is almost certainly a better player as one of two rather than up on his own, so surely if we are pressing the game/showing "adventure" it would be an idea to introduce an extra striker alongside him and give him the opportunity to play as a two. If we are going to move Kuyt inside to "hold the ball up", why not leave Keane on and bring El Zahr on? Keane had definately quitened down in the second half, but that was mainly because (as someone mentioned in an excellent post earlier and I can't remember just now who it was) Arsenal sat a lot deeper once the sending off happened. He wasn't getting the space to work in behind like he had to good effect in the first half. He could though have played off Kuyt, and surely it must have been worth a stab for 15 miutes or so?

Going for such a move would almost certainly have meant taking Lucas off, which by definition would have slightly increased the risk of us losing I think. Worth the gamble though? I think it would be and was yes. Apart from anything else, it would at least have had the effect of allowing Keane to stay on the pitch for the full 90 minutes. We really are at some stage going to have to invest some thought at least into how we are going to man-manage him and rebuild his confidence.

good post..

about the game... Keane's substitution was absolutely uncalled for... with Arsenal down to 10 men and playing deeper i thought we should have gone for 4 in midfield and 2 upfront.. hardly all out attack or a risky setup id think..
Alonso and Lucas were finding it hard to influence the game from the middle of the park.. both seem to favor passing the ball as soon tas they get it rather than take a few steps forward or make a run through the middle or anything.. just get it and either hit it long or to the side... Agger made a couple of runs through the middle and looked dangerous in both runs and i thought we'd take lucas off and have gerrard in the middle carrying the ball forward through the middle of the park and just trying to influence the game a bit more... we had to stretch it a bit it was a scrappy old game make no mistake about it but it suited Arsenal with them being a player down...

overall.. poor subs that more likely than not cost us 2 points

Agree with wat you said about alonso. But when gerrard players deeper with 2 up front xabi tends to look for him through the middle more often and its dangerous. And with lucas giving us nothing when we were in possession i thought we should have made a more positive substitution when adebayor went off. I also thought that kuyt was very negative in the 2nd half when we needed to push on and look for the 2nd goal. He was inclined to pass the ball back down the field every time he got on it rather than try something more creative or attack minded.

[bigmick]

Chelsea lack ambition. It's official!

  Is it slightly different to be down to 10 men after 35 minutes compared to the other team having a man sent off with half an hour to go?

We don't and didn't lack adventure and ambition because we didn't eventually win the game, we lacked it because we didn't for instance play with two up top until there was two minutes left to play.

It really is bizarre sometimes that those who spend the most time slagging other people off for making "ridiculous" posts, post up the oddest of things.

Oh well. At least the discussion was sensible on and off for a while.

[Kharhaz]

Ambition (too me) would be playing this..Im not gonna show the defence becuase thats nothing to do with going for it,or ambition!

           Gerrard   Masherano   Alonso  Riera

                       Keane     Torres

I'd beg Rafa if I ever met the man to play this!
I want that team picked and stuck with as soon as Nando is back,in every EPL match,home or away against UTD or WBA!
But Gerrard does'nt wanna play there and Rafa wont stick with 4-4-2,its just the way things are.

At the end of the day..Gerrard is one of the best players around and if he feels he's more effective in the centre so be it..But my opinion is its very selfish of him.
And Rafa will always chop and change formations..thats just the way he is.I can see his logic in most tactical setups of the team,but still feel sticking with 4-4-2 and "letting them worry about us" is the way to go..WONT HAPPEN THOUGH!

The main point of that post for me is Gerrard on the right. Whether he likes it there or not he is effective and makes more things happen. His highest tally of goals in a season is from the right side of midfield. He has put in some top performances in central midfield but there are many games he has "vanished".

[Rush Job]

Ambition (too me) would be playing this..Im not gonna show the defence becuase thats nothing to do with going for it,or ambition!

           Gerrard   Masherano   Alonso  Riera

                       Keane     Torres

I'd beg Rafa if I ever met the man to play this!
I want that team picked and stuck with as soon as Nando is back,in every EPL match,home or away against UTD or WBA!
But Gerrard does'nt wanna play there and Rafa wont stick with 4-4-2,its just the way things are.

At the end of the day..Gerrard is one of the best players around and if he feels he's more effective in the centre so be it..But my opinion is its very selfish of him.
And Rafa will always chop and change formations..thats just the way he is.I can see his logic in most tactical setups of the team,but still feel sticking with 4-4-2 and "letting them worry about us" is the way to go..WONT HAPPEN THOUGH!

Spot on, I'd love us to give that a go.
On the subject of Keanes confidence or lack of did anyone see his post match interview with ssn? He stated in a quite matter of fact way that he doesn't lack confidence and thats never been a problem, he would just like to be scoring more.
He should have been played with a partner as soon as the sending off happened.

[bigmick]

He should have been played with a partner as soon as the sending off happened.

Feck me Rushie, everybody else thinks I'm a c... but you agree with me 

[milou]

I have been reading this forum for YEARS but not sure why I seldom posted anything! And let me tell u Bigmick, you are no c...! In fact you are one of the only few posters that I take seriously bcos you really talk a lot of sense.. esp on your favorite "R" topic

Anyway, back to the thread.. I do think we missed the opportunity to at least TRY HARDER to win (Feel free to use other vocabs u like but the gist is the same). Of cos noone knows whether we would have lost, still drew or won the match... even if we were more "positive" in the last 30min. But it was pretty clear to me that we just didn’t choose to “go for the kill" by taking off our more attacking players.”Going for the kill” to me is like those few matches (earlier in the season) when we had to come from behind.. by putting more strikers, 4 wingers without fullbacks on the pitch (if I remember correctly).. and actually won. Luck? Maybe. But you create your own luck by our actions.

So I will controversially say that we probably would have a better chance of winning the match if we were still one goal down when the sending off happened.. bcos I think Rafa would have done the substitutions totally differently. With 30mins, more attacking players and a “winning mentality”, we MAY just nick 2 goals. Well, before someone slates me.. I equally admit there is a higher chance of losing.

I think there is a major difference between “we must secure our draw and try to win it if we can” and “we must try to win it, eventhough we may lose”. Unfortunately, Rafa chose the former (he almost always does, hence all the draws.. this and last seasons) bcos we didn't have to win (I must admit I would happily take 1pt in Emirates before the match). My analysis is that Rafa just isn't wired to take lots of chances unless absolutely necessary or pushed against the wall (like scenarios above).

Similarly, it is not that Rafa put more emphasis in UCL, it is just that with the knock-out format, he seems to have less choice to play safe.. bcos more often than not, he has to make things happen (sometimes miracle) in the return leg.. and actually did!

So I think Rafa is just being Rafa.. And regardless what everyone (fans, press, G&H, etc) says, he will still do it his way. We just have to accept the way he works until he wins us no 19 or when he leaves. For the record, I think he hasn't "seen the light" in his management bcos to him, there is no light to start with! Great managers like him (or similarly.. leaders/politicians/etc) do not change their convictions and philosophies easily.. bcos that is what make them successful in the first place.

We can just hope his methods will work in BPL , as much as it has in UCL.

[Sabre]

about the game... Keane's substitution was absolutely uncalled for... with Arsenal down to 10 men and playing deeper i thought we should have gone for 4 in midfield and 2 upfront.. hardly all out attack or a risky setup id think..
Alonso and Lucas were finding it hard to influence the game from the middle of the park..

Two questions.

a) How did Keane get the goal pass? from where did it come?
b) Did Arsenal play a very advanced line of defence? Did they try to make the pitch smaller?

If the answer to b) is yes, then you can't blame the team trying diagonals and long balls from deep positions.

[Santa]

Chelsea lack ambition. It's official!

  Is it slightly different to be down to 10 men after 35 minutes compared to the other team having a man sent off with half an hour to go?

We don't and didn't lack adventure and ambition because we didn't eventually win the game, we lacked it because we didn't for instance play with two up top until there was two minutes left to play.

It really is bizarre sometimes that those who spend the most time slagging other people off for making "ridiculous" posts, post up the oddest of things.

Oh well. At least the discussion was sensible on and off for a while.

can't believe that ER is still moaning...what's been posted in the forum about our lack of adventure immediately after the game is being repeated in all the press and most post-match commentaries it's that obvious but he's too blind to admit it...but it's his opinion so I'll let it be but when he resort to name calling and swearing to push his points through, I know he is just plain blind and ignorant...so be it! 

[aCe']

about the game... Keane's substitution was absolutely uncalled for... with Arsenal down to 10 men and playing deeper i thought we should have gone for 4 in midfield and 2 upfront.. hardly all out attack or a risky setup id think..
Alonso and Lucas were finding it hard to influence the game from the middle of the park..

Two questions.

a) How did Keane get the goal pass? from where did it come?
b) Did Arsenal play a very advanced line of defence? Did they try to make the pitch smaller?

If the answer to b) is yes, then you can't blame the team trying diagonals and long balls from deep positions.

surely ur not tryin to suggest that playin a 10 man Arsenal side that was playing a much deeper line we should have been playing the long ball looking for someone to run off a defender's shoulder or anything... it was clear that they would be changing things around... keeping it tighter at the back with plenty of room for our players in our own half but less and less space as we advance with the balll.. just a natural reaction to a numeric disadvantage i would think...

anyways... we needed someone to influence the game from the middle of the park.. try to make darting run through the middle or little lay offs to wingers behind their fullbacks or something.. Gerrard couldnt get on the ball enough because imo our setup was too rigid and didnt leave the players on the ball with too many options as soon as Arsenal went down to 10 men... didnt seem to me like we were trying hard enough to win it.. the subs certainly did very little to reassure me..

anyways... thought going for Gerrard-Alonso in the middle with the 2 natural wingers in Riera and say ElZhar with Keane partnering whoever it is in attack would actually be better for our allround attacking play... we yet again looked flat and void of ideas and the manager seemed to do little to try and change it around... Babel coming on for Riera was a big mistake imo... so was the Keane substitution... Benayoun should have come on given our options if Riera had to be taken off and Keane should never have been taken off in the first place...

diagonal balls were ok in the first half i guess given the way Arsenal played ... but as soon as they went down to 10 men ans started playing a different game we should have adjusted our gameplan accordingly.. that we didnt do .... and that cost us two points imo...

[Emerald Red]

Chelsea lack ambition. It's official!

  Is it slightly different to be down to 10 men after 35 minutes compared to the other team having a man sent off with half an hour to go?

We don't and didn't lack adventure and ambition because we didn't eventually win the game, we lacked it because we didn't for instance play with two up top until there was two minutes left to play.

It really is bizarre sometimes that those who spend the most time slagging other people off for making "ridiculous" posts, post up the oddest of things.

Oh well. At least the discussion was sensible on and off for a while.

can't believe that ER is still moaning...what's been posted in the forum about our lack of adventure immediately after the game is being repeated in all the press and most post-match commentaries it's that obvious but he's too blind to admit it...but it's his opinion so I'll let it be but when he resort to name calling and swearing to push his points through, I know he is just plain blind and ignorant...so be it! 

Who's asking you, knobhead?

[Fo Dne]

Chelsea lack ambition. It's official!

  Is it slightly different to be down to 10 men after 35 minutes compared to the other team having a man sent off with half an hour to go?

We don't and didn't lack adventure and ambition because we didn't eventually win the game, we lacked it because we didn't for instance play with two up top until there was two minutes left to play.

It really is bizarre sometimes that those who spend the most time slagging other people off for making "ridiculous" posts, post up the oddest of things.

Oh well. At least the discussion was sensible on and off for a while.

can't believe that ER is still moaning...what's been posted in the forum about our lack of adventure immediately after the game is being repeated in all the press and most post-match commentaries it's that obvious but he's too blind to admit it...but it's his opinion so I'll let it be but when he resort to name calling and swearing to push his points through, I know he is just plain blind and ignorant...so be it! 

Who's asking you, knobhead?

You're another fool who contributes nothing to the forum except calling anyone a name who dares to disagree with Benitez's rediculous decisions.

Take you're dick out of the managers , he has massive faults.