Liverpool FC Forum

by **ConnO'var** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 1:50 pm

Sabre wrote:Rotation, as always, has a minor effect, and most of it is noticed in the freshness of players.

Sabre / LFC2007,

Excellent posts guys.... I guess it comes as no surprise that I'd disagree with that statement and line of reasoning however..

The reasons for that has been discussed ad nauseum in this thread so I won't go into details but I'd like the 2 of you to consider a couple of points on the so called freshness of players

1. We have completed 3 out of the 4 games that we will be having in 9 days...... with the last being a crucial match against a formidable opponent in Inter in the last remaining competition for which we have a reasonably realistic chance of winning. Yet Rafa has ceased to rotate the spine of the team overmuch knowing full well that the players are going to be tired. If freshness is really an issue why did he not rotate as much as he usually does? After all the match at San Siro is not going to be a walk in the park. We are playing the league leaders of Serie A after all.

2. As for freshness at the end of the season... what good is that going to do if we are already out of 2 (possibly 3... I haven't given up on the league yet, no matter unrealistic it is...

) of the 4 competitions we've entered for? We'll have the freshest players playing for what exactly?...... the Champions League... a marvelous trophy to be sure but out of the running for the league again by a fair margin.

I just don't see how that can be worth it, guys....

I know I can't convince you so I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

btw..... I'm glad to see that Xabi's slowly playing his way back to form. We've missed him and the system we're playing now finally allows us to play all members of the "best midfield in the world".

by **Sabre** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 2:02 pm

You can't convince me, but not because I don't pay attention nor because I think you all are talking bóllocks. It's like the logical demonstration that judge made a couple of weeks back. It makes sense, provided all the premises in which he bases the reasoning are true, and I'm not sure of that.

I won't argue that a Liverpool team that plays without Torres and Gerrard is weaker. But excuse me, without them, you have to beat Barnsley or Birmingham at home. So if you don't, don't blame rotation, blame the professionals (including Alonso) who didn't play well enough.

Plus, not all the times that this two players have been left out are down to Rafa's caprices mate. Remember that Torres was injured in Spanish squad and was re-injured for playing him too soon. Some of the absences have been reasonable precautions rather than rotation policy.

That said, I admit in some games the team selection of Rafa left me this face

but I certainly think that a game like the one of Barsnley have to be dealt even with your best two players.

As for Alonso's game, I feel relief. I feel relief because he was having a bad patch morale wise. He gave some tickets for a couple of mates 2 weeks ago and he confessed that he was training hard, but he didn't know why he was again out of the team, my friends said he had the morale a bit down. Good to see he's been working harder after the injury and that has allowed him to come back to the team.

by **Bad Bob** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 2:10 pm

Sabre wrote:there's still some rotation needless to say, and players like Kuyt or Pennant can enter the team or be on the bench.

That's the key, mate. I still believe in small doses of rotation. Two to three players per match maximum, so long as it's players that are not part of the established spine of the team (unless it's an early round of a domestic cup when I still feel that mass rotation is worth the risk). Also, as long as the formation is consistent. If we've been winning comfortably with 4-2-3-1 don't change the system. If 4-4-2 is getting the job done, the same thinking applies. Keeping the system intact and maintaining that spine of Reina, Carra, Agger (eventually), Mascherano, Alonso, Gerrard and Torres, whilst minimizing the number of changes in other personnel to maintain continuity is the way forward. Another key step is to add a few more quality attacking players to the side who can hopefully add to the ranks of the "must play" spine. Pennant, Kuyt, Benayoun, Crouch, Riise all have their uses coming off the bench but we need a couple more diamonds in the mold of Torres to really carry the attacking load when Stevie and/or Fernando's form inevitably drop off.

But, crucially, now that we're getting back to playing like we are capable of, it doesn't seem like we're a million miles away from a title challenging side anymore. Let's chalk this season up to experience and get about the task of building for next season.

by **ConnO'var** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 2:20 pm

Sabre wrote:You can't convince me, but not because I don't pay attention nor because I think you all are talking bóllocks. It's like the logical demonstration that judge made a couple of weeks back. It makes sense, provided all the premises in which he bases the reasoning are true, and I'm not sure of that.

I won't argue that a Liverpool team that plays without Torres and Gerrard is weaker. But excuse me, without them, you have to beat Barnsley or Birmingham at home. So if you don't, don't blame rotation, blame the professionals (including Alonso) who didn't play well enough.

Plus, not all the times that this two players have been left out are down to Rafa's caprices mate. Remember that Torres was injured in Spanish squad and was re-injured for playing him too soon. Some of the absences have been reasonable precautions rather than rotation policy.

That said, I admit in some games the team selection of Rafa left me this face but I certainly think that a game like the one of Barsnley have to be dealt even with your best two players.

As for Alonso's game, I feel relief. I feel relief because he was having a bad patch morale wise. He gave some tickets for a couple of mates 2 weeks ago and he confessed that he was training hard, but he didn't know why he was again out of the team, my friends said he had the morale a bit down. Good to see he's been working harder after the injury and that has allowed him to come back to the team.

I hear you Sabre..... and in this post I agree almost 100% of the points you raised.

We should be good enough to beat Barnsley, Birmingham etc.
And for sure, the players MUST shoulder some of the blame for a few of the appalling performances we've churned out this season.
Injuries are inevitable and no one in their right mind would question that .... and precautionary measures just make good sense and SHOULD be taken when warranted..

The question then becomes... Why did we not beat the likes of Birmingham et al and have turned in dire performances against some of the weaker teams? Why do we struggle when we don't have Torres and Gerrard in the team?

It can become a perplexing series of questions. Are the rest of the team that far off the pace? I find that hard to accept as it's essentially the same set of players that won us the Champions League and FA cup and took us to another European final. Or is it the fact that they are confused with the multitude of tactical and personnel changes?

For me, the answer is the latter.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, the premiership simply does not allow you time on the ball that Europe allows. I believe that you need an instinctive understanding of your team mates style preferences and positioning that can only come with a clear definition of roles and sufficient familiarity with each other that can only come with regular game time together. Does that make the premiership a tougher competition than Europe? Of course not, merely a different one requiring a different approach for us to be successful in.

Rightly or wrongly.... only time will tell I guess.

by **maguskwt** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 2:30 pm

Bad Bob wrote:
Sabre wrote:there's still some rotation needless to say, and players like Kuyt or Pennant can enter the team or be on the bench.

That's the key, mate. I still believe in small doses of rotation. Two to three players per match maximum, so long as it's players that are not part of the established spine of the team (unless it's an early round of a domestic cup when I still feel that mass rotation is worth the risk). Also, as long as the formation is consistent. If we've been winning comfortably with 4-2-3-1 don't change the system. If 4-4-2 is getting the job done, the same thinking applies. Keeping the system intact and maintaining that spine of Reina, Carra, Agger (eventually), Mascherano, Alonso, Gerrard and Torres, whilst minimizing the number of changes in other personnel to maintain continuity is the way forward. Another key step is to add a few more quality attacking players to the side who can hopefully add to the ranks of the "must play" spine. Pennant, Kuyt, Benayoun, Crouch, Riise all have their uses coming off the bench but we need a couple more diamonds in the mold of Torres to really carry the attacking load when Stevie and/or Fernando's form inevitably drop off.

But, crucially, now that we're getting back to playing like we are capable of, it doesn't seem like we're a million miles away from a title challenging side anymore. Let's chalk this season up to experience and get about the task of building for next season.

for me the formation plays a big part in our recent resurgence... maybe some formations are more feasible for rotation than others... in the newcastle game we rotated our wingers as well as one of our midfielders... we've been rotating our defence in the last 3 games too with carra playing RB and arbeloa coming in and out...so it is actually quite bollox that rafa has stopped rotating...

I have to admit, maybe with the sort of players we have now, this 4-2-3-1 is our best formation even though I have my doubts about gerrard playing in that role... because of our 2 holding midfielders it allows our wingers to focus more on attack which is more suitable for babel and kuyt... IMO this is the key... with this formation we cannot allow Torres to be isolated up front. the forward pressure from our wingers as well as gerrard makes this formation work... so now it seems as if we've hit a winning formula in terms of formation and rafa should keep it...

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:54 pm

From what I can see and make of it, 90% of people seem happy with this 4-2-3-1 malarky...does that then mean "the creative second forward" people were so keen on a few weeks back can be dropped down our priority list?

I think a forward is still important for us to have, but now not somebody in the Zola or Dalglish mould. They wouldn't be able to work in this formation as the lone man up top. I think Crouch can do a job by holding the ball and bringing others into play, but if we're going to sign a forward in the summer with this formation then it has to be a Torres style player rather than a real creative man IMO.

by **nobybob** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 4:27 pm

In my opinion rotation is a necessary evil--i would love nothing more than for us to play our best players in their best positions week in week out for many reasons not least of which as this can only increase understandings between players that only time playing together can forge. Players confidence increases as they become more aware of exactly what is expected of them individually, of the part they play and how this relates to the bigger picture.
But then we have to go back to the real world, a world were players get tired , injured, suspended , or just out of form, a world were changes can be forced upon you like it or not. Then of course the particular abilities (or lack of ) of the player coming in may force further changes to the system and in turn more rotation. For example if Torres had to be replaced by Crouch, as much as i like the big man it must be said that pace is not an asset he has in abundance, he needs the ball to be crossed from the wide to be truly effective. So this change might in turn force the introduction of maybe Pennant ,and so on and so forth you get my point.
So if rotation is a necessary evil then the question must be how do we best use it to the advantage (or the least detriment) of the team. Well in my opinion for rotation to work effectively the players coming in have to be TOP CLASS , we suffer in this respect as cannot afford to have a couple of £20-£30 million players sitting on the bench unlike chelski or manure. We also need these players to be inform, confident, and for them to fit into the current system , formation, with the least disruption as possible. Its a difficult balancing act with all the pro s and cons to rotation and at times Rafa has used it a little more than i personally would like, and unfortunately some of the players brought in against the so called lesser teams have just not performed up to expectations costing valuable points. However i feel Rafa has learnt a lesson and next season we will be seeing less rotation and if DIC do their bit maybe when RAFA has to rotate we will have those £20-£30 million sitting eagerly on the bench praying for their chance to show what they can do as part of europe's best team.

by **maguskwt** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 6:19 pm

god_bless_john_houlding wrote:From what I can see and make of it, 90% of people seem happy with this 4-2-3-1 malarky...does that then mean "the creative second forward" people were so keen on a few weeks back can be dropped down our priority list?

I think a forward is still important for us to have, but now not somebody in the Zola or Dalglish mould. They wouldn't be able to work in this formation as the lone man up top. I think Crouch can do a job by holding the ball and bringing others into play, but if we're going to sign a forward in the summer with this formation then it has to be a Torres style player rather than a real creative man IMO.

gbjh... we can still buy a creative second striker... in that case he'll be playing where gerrard is playing now and gerrard can go back to CM or as RW...it will change the dynamics subtly but will still work... if we can get a very good creative second striker like diego we will have more options... sounding like rafa now...

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 6:34 pm

maguskwt wrote:
god_bless_john_houlding wrote:From what I can see and make of it, 90% of people seem happy with this 4-2-3-1 malarky...does that then mean "the creative second forward" people were so keen on a few weeks back can be dropped down our priority list?

I think a forward is still important for us to have, but now not somebody in the Zola or Dalglish mould. They wouldn't be able to work in this formation as the lone man up top. I think Crouch can do a job by holding the ball and bringing others into play, but if we're going to sign a forward in the summer with this formation then it has to be a Torres style player rather than a real creative man IMO.

gbjh... we can still buy a creative second striker... in that case he'll be playing where gerrard is playing now and gerrard can go back to CM or as RW...it will change the dynamics subtly but will still work... if we can get a very good creative second striker like diego we will have more options... sounding like rafa now...

In this new formation, Gerrard wouldn't be as affective in the centre because he'd be sitting to deep. Also he and Torres have built up an understanding right now, and a new player playing behind Torres would have to build up that same relationship very quickly. It's for these reasons I think Gerrard should remain playing behind Torres and this "creative forward" isn't as important as it may of been in a 4-4-2 system.

by **maguskwt** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 6:39 pm

god_bless_john_houlding wrote:
maguskwt wrote:
god_bless_john_houlding wrote:From what I can see and make of it, 90% of people seem happy with this 4-2-3-1 malarky...does that then mean "the creative second forward" people were so keen on a few weeks back can be dropped down our priority list?

I think a forward is still important for us to have, but now not somebody in the Zola or Dalglish mould. They wouldn't be able to work in this formation as the lone man up top. I think Crouch can do a job by holding the ball and bringing others into play, but if we're going to sign a forward in the summer with this formation then it has to be a Torres style player rather than a real creative man IMO.

gbjh... we can still buy a creative second striker... in that case he'll be playing where gerrard is playing now and gerrard can go back to CM or as RW...it will change the dynamics subtly but will still work... if we can get a very good creative second striker like diego we will have more options... sounding like rafa now...

In this new formation, Gerrard wouldn't be as affective in the centre because he'd be sitting to deep. Also he and Torres have built up an understanding right now, and a new player playing behind Torres would have to build up that same relationship very quickly. It's for these reasons I think Gerrard should remain playing behind Torres and this "creative forward" isn't as important as it may of been in a 4-4-2 system.

well then we can revert back to 4-4-2 if we get a creative striker in the calibre of diego...

... after all I think that the formation should suit the players we have... and right now this formation seems to be playing to our strengths because of the quality we have in midfield...

by **Bad Bob** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 8:25 pm

If we're going to persist with this formation, I think we need to be looking for someone who can play wide and in the hole to improve on/complement Kuyt/Babel/Benayoun/Pennant (delete as necessary). That is to say that, if we persist with this formation, Stevie needs to be allowed to keep doing what he's doing and it's the attackers on either side of him in the "3" that we need to look at improving upon (perhaps with the exception of Babel if he continues to develop).

Someone like a David Silva (from what I've seen) or an Arjen Robben (not that we'd get him) would be ideal for this kind of system. In the 4-2-3-1 formation, much of the true width will come from the fullbacks on the overlap but there is still a need for the wide attackers--Babel and Kuyt of late--to start wide before cutting in field, with the ball or after laying it into the path of the fullback on the overlap. Benayoun yesterday often cut in field too quickly and denied us an outlet down the left flank. So, whoever we buy needs to have the ability to cause danger out wide as well as in and around the box.

by **bigmick** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:34 pm

nobybob wrote:In my opinion rotation is a necessary evil--i would love nothing more than for us to play our best players in their best positions week in week out

People who have a problem with the levels of rotation which is "Rafa style" though, are not, never have, and in the main never will say we should play our best players in our best positions week in week out.

It is a physical impossibility. No team, ever, has won the english Premiership by playing the same team week in week out.

I wish I had a pound for every time I've said that this season.

by **bigmick** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:47 pm

As far as playing this particular formation is concerned, I like it only because it maximises the current sum of our parts. We haven't got a second striker worthy of the name? Well don't play one then. Haven't got a decent wide midfielder? play a middle five then and take the onus away. Kuyt can't score a goal? stick him wide right. Alonso can't get in the team? play three central midfielders then. Gerrard doesn't like it on the right? play him down the centre behind Torres then. Nothing wrong with that of course, playing a system and formation which allows your best players to flourish, as well as your lesser players (and the form of Kuyt which has been a revelation is a shining example) makes perfect sense.

If we are going to persist with it though and have pretensions of winning the League with it, two things need to happen IMHO. Firstly either Alonso, Masherano or a combination of the two absolutely must provide more imput going forward. This is both in terms of joining the play and goal threat. At the moment it's great that Gerrard and Torres have a perfect marriage, but one or both of the other central midfielders needs to become a bit on the side. The feeling persists that against the better teams, we'll end up playing 4-4-1 with Gerrard wandering around like a lost puppy (and therefore not even worthy of a number) and the other two central midfielders BOTH performing the role of holding midfielder. I have absolutely no doubts that this will be the game plan of Man Utd, arsenal and Everton when they play us should we go with this formation. FWIW I think the onus is on Alonso as he is much the more creative footballer of the two. He simply must join in the Torres/Gerrard love fest a little more.

The second thing is that we are going to need a bit of quality in a game breaking sense on one of the flanks. I say one, because I'm happy having a workhorse down one side. The other though must have a bit of fantasy. Stick a young John Barnes down the left side and this team would probably win the Premiership next season. I never thought I'd hear myself saying it but I like Kuyt on the right in a central five, but we need a bit of magic down the left.

All that said, phew, I think we will be best served long term by playing 4-4-2 and buying Saint's creative second striker.

by **redtrader74** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:23 pm

IMO the current run of good results is because each game has become a must win. I think part of the reason we fell apart a bit was because the players felt we should have done better in the league and once we fell behind they lost some of the edge in the league games, (the games didn't matter as much) but with Everton trying to nick 4th place a challenge has been put in front of them. Just as having to win the last 3 group games, just the same way Inter were in the way of a competition all the players know they can do well in, they rose to the challenge. All said the recent games were fairly easy, its the games coming up, Manu, Everton that will show whether we are up to it.

I believe the formation being used is in preparation for the CL, its ideal for it because it can be a little defensive, ( i know we've scored a few recently!), the midfield can be packed and shield the back, and we have enough quality up front to nick a goal, which is all we may need in the CL games.

Enough of the back patting lads, Rafa has only relaxed the rotation because we have far fewer games to play, and i'd hazard a guess that were we 1-0 down to Inter or 0-0, 1-1

that SG and Torres would probably have been rested over the weekend. Whatever it may be, it good that we are winning and winning well.

by **JC_81** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:31 pm

I agree with Mick and the others who are saying that the current formation is getting the best out of the players we have. There is no doubt about it, and I'd stick with it for the rest of the season.

It's going great now with Gerrard and Torres bang in form, but unfortunately that won't last forever, and when one or both of them hit a bad patch we'll struggle to get goals (although that is probably going to be true whatever formation we play).

We still need another wide player and a forward for next season, minimum. I hope Babel will push on next season and if we keep this formation, it's probably ideal for him as he is probably best suited to being one of the wide players in a front 3.

However, I'm all for sticking with the formation for now and we'll see what happens.

Liverpool FC Forum

The rotation thread - All "R" talk in here please!

Who is online