Liverpool FC Forum

by **Leonmc0708** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:40 am

So whats the problem ?

by **112-1077774096** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:47 am

oh thats a sensible poll

by **bigmick** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:02 am

Well as I got the first vote in, it's unanimous!

No in all seriousness, the problem is like a chicken and egg one. We are playing without any confidence, cohesion and fluency and it spreads like a cancer in a football team. The crowd get anxious, the players get anxious and the opposition gets more up for it. You need leaders to pull you out of the tailspin, be it players or coaches. You need collective belief, the willingness to roll your sleeves up and battle it out, very much like Man Utd had to do over the last month or so. They did it and so can we.

What originally put us into the tailspin? Well unsurprisingly on my part, nobody will ever convince me (the team could convince me on the pitch although I've yet to see any evidence) that you can alter the team 62 times in ten games or whatever on earth the figures are and not have an effect on team morale, confidence, fluidity, cohesion, understanding or whatever you like to call it. If it's "nothing to do with rotation" as some would have you believe, it is a fair question you're asking Leon. Maybe the players have just all become collectively sh!te at the same time, every last one of 'em.

I asked on another thread about partnerships. Dalglish used to put Rush in without looking, Toshack would back head it into Keegans stride, Lawrenson and Hansen could read each others minds as well as the play. Souness and Mcdermot dovetailed perfectly in the centre of midfield, a perfect combination. There have been many other examples over the recent years. Arsenal's back four of the early nineties, Gary Neville and David Beckham down the Man Utd right for many years, Bruce and Pallister, Yorke and Cole. Are we really to believe that despite these players playing alongside each other on probably hundreds occasions that they never developed an "understanding", a "partnership". Was it all a myth? Did we decieve ourselves over the years, is it really just possible to play different players with different players every single week and it just to gel instantly?

If it is the case that rotation has nothing to do with it, fluidity and cohesion are totally independent of the number of changes you make, why then not make eight changes per game? nine? ten even? If you changed the whole team apart form the golaie, would that have an effect on cohesion, passing fluency etc. "Aw feck off Mick you t0sser, you're just being silly now you c***" And I am. So changing five and six is OK and doesn't have an effect, but ten does. Maybe the magic number is eight. Maybe it's eight point five if we listen to Tompkins.

I'll tell you this here and now. the tiniest little alteration to a football team radically effects the way it operates. Pick exactly the SAME team, and switch the full backs arouns and tell me it won't completely alter the way you play. Pick exactly the SAME team and don't switch the fullbacks around, but get the holding midfielder to push on ten yards and it will radically effect the way the team plays. We all marvel at the tactical genius behind an effective substitution, a quiet word telling the winger to tuck in which has a huge effect on the outcome of a game. Then we try and convince ourselves that we can make five and six changes and it won't effect the way we play. I'm not going to surprise anyone here, but there's only one place I can cast my vote.

by **Sabre** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:10 am

I voted others: I'm a football fan, not a pundit or a coach that has envy of Rafa for coaching a top team and he's commenting games in TV unemployed. I cannot know for sure where the reasons lie Leonmc

by **Feugo** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:32 am

I stay awake at 3 till 5 a.m just to see my favorite football team in the world.. YNWA

rotation duh~

just imagine if Rafa got sacked and they hire Mourinho that would be lol..
just if

by **Sabre** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:38 am

Well, that might be a good idea. If rotation is that bad, you can actually pick anybody who doesn't rotate and he would do better

Let's pick Uncle Albert for instance.

I'm sure rotation will get many votes. Bigmick is knowledgeable, and also is clever enough to know what's the proper timing for a poll

With the team we played yesterday, not only with many changes but also players not playing regularly, it would be fool to deny that the team is affected. But yesterday is the not best example for rotation policy. Funnily enough yesterday I think Rafa was doing what he was asked for, priorizing the league.

by **Ciggy** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:45 am

Who voted for Everton

by **bigmick** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:48 am

Sabre wrote:Bigmick is knowledgeable, and also is clever enough to know what's the proper timing for a poll

Have to say you're quite right sabes, the poll couldn't have been timed better

Truth be told though mate I didn't start it.

by **Sabre** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:50 am

I know mate, it was Leonmc trying to criticise the "scapegoating" I think . But truth is, you made a clever twist (and a funny one too) to make a pro - rotation campaing in this poll. And I must say that in a good humour tone (1), that is much needed after yesterday if you ask me.

The rest of your post was a good one, but I think the idea behind this poll of Leonmc is that we sometimes try too hard to blame one reason (let him correct me if I'm wrong)

(1)

Well as I got the first vote in, it's unanimous!

That was funny.

by **redtrader74** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:17 am

Ciggy wrote:Who voted for Everton

Ahhh well thats me, i thought that as they are moving out of Liverpool, that the players might have been unnerved at not having a derby to play any more. Or maybe they thought they can't go to Tesco anymore now that the bitters will be housed in 'The Tesco value stadium'.

Don't you know that it might make them play without cohesion, fluidity and stop them developing mind reading skills. Yup i think thats why Sissoko couldn't control the ball, or why Crouch has the strength of a balsa wood chair, or why none of the players played with urgency. Those bitter b@stards foiled us.

P.S it looks like i'm drumming up support....the votes are stacking up!

by **66-1112520797** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:21 am

Who's to blame .....

Hmmmmmmmmm ever since the thread starter has become a mod .....

by **The Grudge** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:32 am

Last nights performance was purely down to the players on the pitch!
Raffa can only lead them to the white line and after that its up to them to perform..its a question of whether they want it more than opponents,last night they looked as if they all wanted to be somewhere else.We looked like a team with problems,im beginning to wonder if all is ok in the dressing room at times and if the players are actually commited to Raffas ideas and way of thginking.

Marsielle wanted it more from the off and deserved all 3 points..we deserved what we got,nothing!
I dont know how any of our ten outfield players could walk in to training today with their heads up,they should be ashamed of that effort.

I could'nt believe what i was watching last night,The french were first to every ball every time our players fought for nothing,it was hard to watch.Im not blaming just him but Sissoko in particular was sh.ite,he done nothong positive all night!

Overall it may not be the end of the world because we still have 4 more group matches and if we win all 13 points should be enough..but if we play like last night we dont deserve it.

In answer to the poll:D
I blame the players because they did not try enough,Benitez has a hard motivating job to do though as he is failing to get them up for it!

by **LittleHobo** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:32 pm

why are we soo far away from valenica under rafa it hurts?

we are like the opposite of his valencia team

by **Sabre** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:35 pm

LittleHobo wrote:why are we soo far away from valenica under rafa it hurts?

we are like the opposite of his valencia team

Yes, we're far from Valencia.

They reached the CL final once, not twice, and they lost it.

Their coach left Valencia and joined Liverpool, a common thing to see when a coach does his work well, he gets promoted to a bigger club.

I remember Valencia losing under Rafa aswell. They were not invincible, and they won the league by one point IIRC, I'm sure we'll win it by 4!

Honestly, they were not above in their game. Of course yes yesterday, we were poor, but not overall.

by **Igor Zidane** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:35 pm

The Grudge wrote:Last nights performance was purely down to the players on the pitch!
Raffa can only lead them to the white line and after that its up to them to perform..its a question of whether they want it more than opponents,last night they looked as if they all wanted to be somewhere else.We looked like a team with problems,im beginning to wonder if all is ok in the dressing room at times and if the players are actually commited to Raffas ideas and way of thginking.

Marsielle wanted it more from the off and deserved all 3 points..we deserved what we got,nothing!
I dont know how any of our ten outfield players could walk in to training today with their heads up,they should be ashamed of that effort.

I could'nt believe what i was watching last night,The french were first to every ball every time our players fought for nothing,it was hard to watch.Im not blaming just him but Sissoko in particular was sh.ite,he done nothong positive all night!

Overall it may not be the end of the world because we still have 4 more group matches and if we win all 13 points should be enough..but if we play like last night we dont deserve it.

In answer to the poll:D
I blame the players because they did not try enough,Benitez has a hard motivating job to do though as he is failing to get them up for it!

I voted with barry , spot on post. :veryangry

Liverpool FC Forum

Where does the blame lie then ?

Where does the blame lie then ?

Who is online