Liverpool FC Forum

[Bad Bob]

who asked you to get involved? nobody. It was a simple discussion about BigMick's sillyness to bring Spurs into a discussion about our rotation policy. So next time "boyyo" keep your nose out pal. good fellow 

Pass_da_dutchie, as you can see this thread is long as fúck, and it has covered rotation in Liverpool and rotation as a whole. At some point it was discussed it's a method it won't work in England never. And at some point I mentioned a new rotationist manager was in England so we could be able to check more instances of the same method.

So with all that context Bigmick brought the example of Juande struggling, so I think it's not sillyness nor obsession with other teams, but coherent with the debate.

Interesting post of LFC2007. 75 / 15 = 5, 41/10 = 4.1, I wouldn't say those ratios are light years away. And it remains to be seen if the difference is because injuries and olympics left Rafa less options or a "has seen the light". Anyhow that ratio difference doesn't seem to be as the difference between dark and light.

Raw numbers won't make Rafa's rotation right or wrong, results will. I honestly think that if results are good, Rafa's rotation will be sensible, and if we lose, people will even put in doubt when the manager says he hasn't played someone because injury risk -- it has happened.

I've always maintained that the raw numbers of players changed from match to match are a red herring.  It was true last season with 75 in 15 (or whatever) and it's true this season with 41 in 10.  As soon as you throw in something like a Carling Cup match it monkeys everything up.

What matters, IMO, is what the nature of the changes are.  This season Torres and Keane have been a nailed-on strike partnership for all but a couple matches.  Last season we saw Kuyt, Crouch, Voronin and, to a much lesser extent, Torres all rotated during the early season.  We also saw much more swapping around of the CBs and fullbacks last season.  In those two areas of the pitch--strikers and defenders--Rafa has been more consistent in his selections this season and that, for me, says that there has at least been a little light gazed on by the gaffer.

[stmichael]

Serioulsy though, I don't think Rafa has changed a great deal to be honest this season in terms of his policy. I just think we're better placed to rotate this season with Keane taking some of the pressure off Torres and Gerrard and Riera's arrival meaning we can utilise Babel in different ways.

Plus he's not had his back four unsettled a great deal which happened last season.

[bigmick]

who asked you to get involved? nobody. It was a simple discussion about BigMick's sillyness to bring Spurs into a discussion about our rotation policy. So next time "boyyo" keep your nose out pal. good fellow 

Pass_da_dutchie, as you can see this thread is long as fúck, and it has covered rotation in Liverpool and rotation as a whole. At some point it was discussed it's a method it won't work in England never. And at some point I mentioned a new rotationist manager was in England so we could be able to check more instances of the same method.

So with all that context Bigmick brought the example of Juande struggling, so I think it's not sillyness nor obsession with other teams, but coherent with the debate.

Interesting post of LFC2007. 75 / 15 = 5, 41/10 = 4.1, I wouldn't say those ratios are light years away. And it remains to be seen if the difference is because injuries and olympics left Rafa less options or a "has seen the light". Anyhow that ratio difference doesn't seem to be as the difference between dark and light.

Raw numbers won't make Rafa's rotation right or wrong, results will. I honestly think that if results are good, Rafa's rotation will be sensible, and if we lose, people will even put in doubt when the manager says he hasn't played someone because injury risk -- it has happened.

I've always maintained that the raw numbers of players changed from match to match are a red herring.  It was true last season with 75 in 15 (or whatever) and it's true this season with 41 in 10.  As soon as you throw in something like a Carling Cup match it monkeys everything up.

What matters, IMO, is what the nature of the changes are.  This season Torres and Keane have been a nailed-on strike partnership for all but a couple matches.  Last season we saw Kuyt, Crouch, Voronin and, to a much lesser extent, Torres all rotated during the early season.  We also saw much more swapping around of the CBs and fullbacks last season.  In those two areas of the pitch--strikers and defenders--Rafa has been more consistent in his selections this season and that, for me, says that there has at least been a little light gazed on by the gaffer.

You are absolutely right, and once again Bob we're into this thing whereby people try and dispute what is glaringly obvious. Now it seems to me that whether you are pro-rotation, anti it, don't give a sh!t about it one way or another or whatever else, the manager is not changing the team with the same fequency as he was was last season. This applies to the formations we play, the positions we play people in, and the actual personel who start the game.

Now we might be able to make the bare stats appear as though he is rotating to exactly the same extent as last season, but we all know that he isn't. Of the 41 changes he has made this season (and like last season I'd happily discount carling Cup as big players shouldn't be playing in that anyway), a large number of the changes he has made have been due to players being unavailable through injury or International duty or whatever.

Actual styling has been kept to a minimum. I've already said about a page ago that our good start is not because we aren't rotating. I'm not, repeat not, trying to apportion any of the credit for our good start onto non-rotation. I am simply stating a fact that we aren't styling as much. And we aren't.

[woof woof !]

What matters, IMO, is what the nature of the changes are.  This season Torres and Keane have been a nailed-on strike partnership for all but a couple matches.  Last season we saw Kuyt, Crouch, Voronin and, to a much lesser extent, Torres all rotated during the early season.  We also saw much more swapping around of the CBs and fullbacks last season.  In those two areas of the pitch--strikers and defenders--Rafa has been more consistent in his selections this season and that, for me, says that there has at least been a little light gazed on by the gaffer.

Looking at our lineups for the last seven games (ignoring the carling cup match). Carragher and Skrtle have started every game. Our CM pairings have revolved around two from Gerrard Alonso and Mascherano whilst the front two have been Torres and Keane  for five of those games with Kuyt filling in on two occasions for Torres and Keane respectively. Arbeloa and Dossena have started five of the seven games together the other two matches being Aurelio/Dossena and Aurelio/Arbeloa.

Assuming that most of the changes were down to injuries and niggles, it does appear that Rafa wherever possible has been playing a consistent team up front, in the center and across the back and despite some less than pretty performances we're coming away with a result. Long may it continue.

Having said all of that I'm wondering how long Rafa will leave the so far unchanged pairing of Carra and Skrtle together. 

[LFC2007]

What matters, IMO, is what the nature of the changes are.  This season Torres and Keane have been a nailed-on strike partnership for all but a couple matches.  Last season we saw Kuyt, Crouch, Voronin and, to a much lesser extent, Torres all rotated during the early season.  We also saw much more swapping around of the CBs and fullbacks last season.  In those two areas of the pitch--strikers and defenders--Rafa has been more consistent in his selections this season and that, for me, says that there has at least been a little light gazed on by the gaffer.

Absolutely agree - looking at the raw numbers will never give an accurate picture, what's more important is the nature of those changes and also the reasons for those changes.


1) Injuries/Olympics - Degen injured, if he was fit, he'd arguably have played in more games this season, probably in place of Arbeloa. Agger - coming off the back of a year without cotinuous football after a recurring injury, Skrtel has taken his chance with generally good performances. Mascherano, Benayoun, Aurelio, Gerrard, Hyypia, Alonso and Torres have all been injured and missed games. Masch and Lucas missed four games due to the Olympics, Babel missed three.

2) New Signings:
Keane - a solution for the present who has vast premiership experience, our second highest ever fee paid. What with the extra pressure on Rafa to succeed, he has to play, and Rafa has acknowledged through his selections that Kuyt isn't an adequate second striker.

2) Riera - a solution for the left side where we've been deprived of alternatives for a while. Hence he will play more often than any other left-sided alternative - especially in the league - if he stays fit.

3) Dossena - has failed to make an impression early on, yet has started as many games at left back as Arbeloa had in the same period last season. There is no Riise to throw into the equation, Aurelio has been intermittently injured, and £7m is a lot for a FB so he will inevitably play.

3) Other reasons:
This time last season Kuyt was coming off the back of a good first season playing as a striker. Throughout last season he saw his role change from stiker to wide man, and he seems to have found his position on the right - in Rafa's eyes.

[Zidane]

Keep it up Rafa!

[JoeTerp]

Now we might be able to make the bare stats appear as though he is rotating to exactly the same extent as last season, but we all know that he isn't.

you mean at the beginning right.  If there was any light seeing, it looks like Rafa must have caught a peek around February or March

[account deleted by request]

Now we might be able to make the bare stats appear as though he is rotating to exactly the same extent as last season, but we all know that he isn't.

you mean at the beginning right.  If there was any light seeing, it looks like Rafa must have caught a peek around February or March

I haven't checked the stats but I think Rafa rotated as heavy as ever towards the end of last season Joe. He was playing almost two separate teams, one for the CL and another for the league, while using two separate formations as well, 4-4-2 in the league and 4-2-3-1 in the CL. 

Because we avoided losing (in the league anyway) the large number of changes match to match were hardly noticed as our focus was fixed on the CL.

So while Rafa caught a glimpse of the light early in the new year it was perhaps starting to dim again by the end of the season.   

[JoeTerp]

Now we might be able to make the bare stats appear as though he is rotating to exactly the same extent as last season, but we all know that he isn't.

you mean at the beginning right.  If there was any light seeing, it looks like Rafa must have caught a peek around February or March

I haven't checked the stats but I think Rafa rotated as heavy as ever towards the end of last season Joe. He was playing almost two separate teams, one for the CL and another for the league, while using two separate formations as well, 4-4-2 in the league and 4-2-3-1 in the CL. 

Because we avoided losing (in the league anyway) the large number of changes match to match were hardly noticed as our focus was fixed on the CL.

So while Rafa caught a glimpse of the light early in the new year it was perhaps starting to dim again by the end of the season.   

maybe your talking about the end end, I was referring more to that March period like the 4-0 victory over West Ham and I am pretty sure that we played 4-2-3-1 in the 2nd Newcastle match that finished 3-0 that had the gerrard to torres and then the torres to gerrard goals (and then the one off pennant's back     )

[account deleted by request]

You are meaning "this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning" 

[JoeTerp]

You are meaning "this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning" 

I've got it down between two candidates:  Churchill and Batman

[JoeTerp]

and while we are on the subject of rotation, The Tinkerman sounds like he could be a Batman villian

[maguskwt]

Actual styling has been kept to a minimum. I've already said about a page ago that our good start is not because we aren't rotating. I'm not, repeat not, trying to apportion any of the credit for our good start onto non-rotation. I am simply stating a fact that we aren't styling as much. And we aren't.

great... now we agree that we're talking about a non-issue here...


jocking aside though... it makes me wonder why rotation is such a disproportionately much more talked about issue on here considering the fact that both the anti and the pro-rotationalists somehow agree to a certain extent that it is not the only factor.

Could it be because of someone's propaganda?     

and now sabre's resurrected it... 

[Sabre]

I never resurrected anything because it never died in the first place . Comments about us playing a more fixed team, comments about giving certain partnership a continuity, comments about styling, are written here and there. And this thread prevents from spreading that discussion to match threads.

Why is it discussed that much? there are several reasons, rotation is more exotic there than it is in my country. In Spain rotation becomes something to talk about if a super-star is benched, other than that it goes unnoticed. I'm not implying, just in case, that Bigmick thinks that because he reads the press, he has his own opinions, I'm saying that's why it doesn't become an "everyday debate" among most footie fans.

For instance, when the Spanish press explains how Juande Ramos is struggling, they talk about signings ups made by the board, not Juande, a young squad, and players that have "terror" to posession football according to someone inside the dressroom. None of the newspapers mentions rotation... and thus almost none of the readers would think it's an important factor.

I say almost, because I'm well aware of rotation and it's dangers, and while I consider it a valid tool, I'm still checking whether it's true that for some reason in England it doesn't work. That is, I have an open mind. I don't discard it's an important factor, I just don't think it is and I'm still checking.

If time passes and the facts keep telling that rotation teams do not succeed, I'll have to admit what's evident, but for me it's difficult to tell where lies the problems of a team when I don't even know how they train.

I do think however that the debates have been too hot when our different points of view aren't that far away. Even a player that doesn't like rotation like Carra admits you can play an spine of 8 and let the other 3 positions are fought. Even a rotationist like me wouldn't make regularly 6 changes... so we're not that far away from each other in the "degree" of rotation.

[account deleted by request]

Carra also admits to being shattered at the end of the 2001 season Sabre(admittedly they played a hell of a lot of games that year) and also at the end of the 2007 season. So maybe he needed rotating MORE, but I wouldn't like to be the one that had to tell him.