Liverpool FC Forum

by **Igor Zidane** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:35 pm

maguskwt wrote:don't know if anyone's posted before, but here you go:

*******************************************
ROONEY SUPPORTS ROTATION POLICY
By Paul Walker, PA Sport

Manchester United striker Wayne Rooney has come out in support of the rotation of players, the same system Liverpool manager Rafael Benitez has been criticised for using.

The Liverpool boss has been criticised for most of the season for his rotation policy, but now former Everton striker Rooney has admitted that United boss Sir Alex Ferguson does exactly the same and it works.

Benitez will be forgiven a wry smile at that, because he has long insisted in the face of fierce opposition that all top clubs rotate their players.

Benitez said on the subject: "When I change players it is rotation, when other managers do it, they call it resting people."

And now Rooney has come out in support of rotation, as it is revealed that Ferguson has not named the same side for successive matches since August.

Despite an injury to Ryan Giggs, Ferguson was able to name Paul Scholes, Owen Hargreaves and Carlos Tevez among the substitutes in midweek in the 2-1 aggregate victory over Lyon in the Champions League, with Cristiano Ronaldo's 30th goal of the season winning the second leg 1-0.

Rooney said in an interview with UEFA: "Last season we had a lot of injuries and we had a few players who played a lot of games and they were tired.

"Now we have a big squad so hopefully the rotation policy will help us. I think we are a lot fresher.

"A lot of players have not played so many games this season. We brought players in, the squad is bigger and we have not really got any serious injuries at the moment."

After brushing aside Roma 7-1 in the Champions League last eight at Old Trafford last year, United ran out of steam against AC Milan in the semi-finals, a combination of fatigue and injuries taking their toll.

It is a situation Ferguson is clearly determined to avoid in a bid to keep his squad fresh.

While the defence is largely settled he rotates his midfield and attack, with summer arrivals Nani, Anderson and Tevez giving him plenty of options.

Ronaldo, now the Champions League's joint leading scorer with six goals, believes the side is "more mature" than last year and Ferguson's ability to keep a harmonious squad while ringing the changes backs that up.

Now this made me smile , i bet you a pound to a pinch of salt that fergie is being hailed a genius whilst Rafa gets ripped . You've gotta laugh. :laugh:

by **Bad Bob** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:39 pm

bigmick wrote: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.

Some good points there, Mick, with respect to 4-2-3-1. On your first point, I have been encouraged in the last couple of games with the way decent shooting chances from just outside the area have fallen to one of the CM "2". As it happened, those chances fell to Mascherano against West Ham and Lucas against Newcastle. Unfortunately, Masch, for all of his other amazing qualities, can't seem to hit the a.rse-end of a donkey with a banjo when shooting and Lucas has shown a heavy touch and a waywardness of shot in those positions of late. So, the spaces are there but you're correct in suggesting that we need to see more of Alonso running into them than we have done.

On the issue of a creative winger, I agree again. For all of Babel's progress of late he is still very one footed, very direct and hence highly predictable. 19 times out of 20 he's going to cut inside from the left flank onto his right foot, shape to shoot, push it to the side when the defender dives in, and leather the ball goalward from there. It won't be long before defenders start showing him onto his left foot and refusing to bite on the shimmy and then what will we see from the lad? Hopefully he'll add more tricks to his locker but a part of me has my doubts. And he's the most creative goal threat we have from out wide, unless you count Kewell, which most of us are declining to do any longer. Pennant, to be fair, has more tricks up his sleeve but his final ball isn't always dependable, he doesn't carry much of a goal threat himself and I question his match intelligence a good deal of the time. So, you're spot on when you say we need someone better for at least one of those positions.

Perhaps there's a compromise available out there? A creative attacker who can effectively play in one of the 'wide' berths in a 4-2-3-1 but who also could fill the 'creative second striker' brief in a 4-4-2. Someone with a better scouting sense than I have can surely draft up a short list?

by **Igor Zidane** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:50 pm

I believe el hadje diouf would be available bob

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:59 pm

Bad Bob wrote:Perhaps there's a compromise available out there? A creative attacker who can effectively play in one of the 'wide' berths in a 4-2-3-1 but who also could fill the 'creative second striker' brief in a 4-4-2. Someone with a better scouting sense than I have can surely draft up a short list?

Aaron Lennon, David Bentley, Ashley Young or Agbonglahor. That's from what I've seen in england, the rest of the golbe I wouldn't know where to start. I see names like Simao, Quaresma, Silva and Diego fly round but I don't what they're like week in week out.

Out of the four english lads I think Bentley is the most realisitic target. Playing for a mickey mouse side like Blackburn, they can't afford to turn down a bid of 7/8 million even for an England international. The other three would cost us an arm and a leg.

For me though, it's not a creative second forward we need but a goal scoring forward. If Torres was to break his leg on the 1st of September 2008, we'd have to wait four whole months relying on Kuyt, Crouch and Voronin (if all at the club) to score the goals before we could even try and buy another forward. That's doesn't fill me with much confidence to be honest. A creative second forward wouldn't be scoring great deals anyway, so we need a goalscoring forward who'd be prepared to sit on the bench. I've been impressed with Benni McCarthy from Blackburn since his arrival to England and wouldn't cost to much. There's always Owen but I doubt he'd sit on the bench. Doyle and Kitson from Reading, not first choice but could fill in when required. I don't think any of these options will go down well on here but I still think a goal scoring forward (back up) is more vital than a creative forward, depending on formation I suppose.

by **bigmick** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:12 am

redtrader74 wrote: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.

S'not often I can say this but I agree with Red here. There has been a little jumping to premature conclusions as far as rotation is concerned from some of the antis and even more bizarrely from some of the other side visa vis our improved form and the delayed Gazelle effect.

Although it's fair to say that there has been a certain "easing" of Rafa style (and obviously not before time) as Sabre pointed out earlier, we went on a similar run before Christmas whilst mass-rotating so I wouldn't be getting the bunting out just yet.

I've been a wee bit unimpressed by our actual play during this particular spell as I think it's a bit stop/start, lacking in rhythm and fluency and there is a good deal of improvement to come. We are winning games, but despite protestations to the contrary by many of my "anti-rotational" right-honourable friends, it must be taken into account that the games are eminently winnable and the chances are we would probably have won them even if we were rotating.

I do think though that we are getting into the habit a bit. Even when we aren't playing well it kind of looks like we will at some point, like Gerrard and Torres will at some stage get something going so it is very encouraging.

For us non-rotational purists there is STILL too much changing the team of course

I can't think of a sensible reason for resting both Kuyt and Babel before the Eurpoean game for instance, other than the manager felt he simply had to get involved in some capacity and felt these were the changes which would do least damage. Whether Kuyt with his lung busting fitness and Babel with his youthfull "youthfullness" actually feel any better for the whole experience I suppose only they will know but I must confess I do have my doubts.

One thing I must come back to is the sneaking assertion that Rafa's earlier "styling" is in some way contributing by way of the "delayed gazelle" effect. It is of course total and utter nonsense, as the vast majority of the key players who are having a positive effect on the outcome of games have played practically every match anyway. Are we to believe for instance that the calamitous decision to rest both Gerrard and Torres at Fratton Park for an hour has meant that they are now jumping out of their skins? What of Torres's two spells out since with injuries? Did they not contribute to his freshness? Maybe Gerrard being taken off for being over-excited at Goodison park is the reason he now feels so fresh?

No, people who are patting themselves on the back for being right on the subject of rotation are going "too early" (that's not to say they aren't right of course, because they are :;):

)
but any talk of the delayed gazelle is utter b0ll0cks. All IMHO of course.

by **redtrader74** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:43 am

I'm not entirely convinced by the delayed gazelle effect, i just think that the way we play and the amount of work Rafa expects from all the players, (for example everybody runs back into the box when the opponents have a corner, Kuyt having to play forward, midfielder and defender in each game

) means fatigue sets into our players earlier than for example a team like Arsenal who allow the ball to do far more of the work. So rotation allows our players to keep our levels of conditioning consistent, but thats just an idea. Although to dismiss the delayed gazelle effect i find rather strange, is it not logical to think that if players that are rested through the season, here and there, play against those who are not,(all other things being equal), near the end of the season, that those rested should be a little bit fitter, is that so out of the realms of possiblities?, or would that dent Micks assertion that rotation has no benefits at all? :;):

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:44 am

Mick you say these games are winnable, this is one thing I hate. I know you're not taking anything away from the lads but the teams we played are still tough games and it doesn't matter who you beat or how you beat them it's still three points at the end of the day if you beat Man United 5-0 or Derby County 1-0, it's still three points, so the opposition shouldn't be brushed off IMO. Also the four teams we played have troubled the top two sides this season. West Ham and Bolton both beat United this year whereas Boro and Newcastle have held Arsenal to draws, which is again why it shouldn't matter who's put in front of you. One of the many reasons why I wasn't as cheesed off as some by Barnsley. It's still 11 against 11 playing football when it comes down to it.

I do agree with some of Mick, like us still rotating to much. My main gripe at this particular bit was Aurellio (my boo boy if truth be told) and Bob pulled me up about it. To summerise Bob's point it was "how can you slag Aurellio off all season then when he's dropped ask why he wasn't playing?" Which I suppose is a fair question and one that would need some sensible explaination. My explaination was Benitez is rotating/dropping/resting a player just as he's found his form. Aurellio's first goal for the club, his confidence would of been sky high and he's dropped. So in Milan if (and I expect him to be) Aurellio is selected he's going to have to start again, finding his feet to the pace. Likewise Kuyt and Babel. Two of them are finding their feet and form in this system so ahead of a hugely important game he drops them. I don't see the logic in that meself. Why drop players who are finding form? It's just going to shatter their confidence even more. That's where rotation fails for me. If you're changing players who are struggling fair enough, but not the ones who are playing well.

by **zarababe** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:15 am

10 points behind - big games to come - let see where this season take us doom gloomers !

by **LFC2007** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:19 am

bigmick wrote:One thing I must come back to is the sneaking assertion that Rafa's earlier "styling" is in some way contributing by way of the "delayed gazelle" effect. It is of course total and utter nonsense, as the vast majority of the key players who are having a positive effect on the outcome of games have played practically every match anyway. Are we to believe for instance that the calamitous decision to rest both Gerrard and Torres at Fratton Park for an hour has meant that they are now jumping out of their skins? What of Torres's two spells out since with injuries? Did they not contribute to his freshness? Maybe Gerrard being taken off for being over-excited at Goodison park is the reason he now feels so fresh?

I refer you to Paco De Miguel.

by **bigmick** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:36 am

zarababe wrote:10 points behind - big games to come - let see where this season take us doom gloomers !

Indeed and well said.

As far as Red's assumption that I've said "rotation has no benefits at all" that wouldn't be a fair representation in all honesty. I think as with all things though, it's no good just looking at the positive effects (if indeed there are any), you must also consider the potential negatives. This applies not just to rotation but to every scenario in football. For instance playing Carragher in central midfield instead of Gerrard would no doubt make the team slightly more able to cope defensively from a midfield point of view, but it would mean that the defnce was weaker and you would lose a whole raft of attacking options. On balance then would there be any benefits to playing Carragher in midfield? Slightly Yes in one area, but overall an emphatic No.

Similarly with rotation Rafa style. When we were changing the team to the extent we were from match to match in the first half of the season, were there any benefits? Well, I think it would be fair to say that if you use the whole squad pretty much all the time (which we just about were doing over each period of four games) then should a player be called into action then he would be more ready than if he hadn't had a game in two months. That's a benefit and it would be silly to deny it. I also think it would be fair to say that if a player only plays one game every ten days as opposed to three, he will feel fresher. That's a benefit. What I don't accept though is that freshness can be carried over to suddenly come into effect six months later. That's nonsense in my opinion, a silly argument.

So what of the negatives if there are any? Well I think it's a silly argument to contest that it's harder for a team to find fluency and cohesion if the personel is changing from game to game. Look back through this thread and incredible as it may seem there are many examples of posters contesting this point. It was daft then and it's daft now. Obviously at the start of the season where no team has any momentum and confidence you need to build some, and the easiest way to get there is to play with a settled team and formation.

So was it all worth it, did we get positives out of the "Rafa style" period? Well if like me you don't buy into the delayed gazelle theory, the answer is no. Even if you do buy into the delayed gazelle theory, if you accept that "Rafa style" cost us cohesion and confidence to the extent which I'm claiming, the answer is still no. It's hardly worth being Gazelle like obviously if you're out of the League.

My suspicion is though that some people, probably yourself included, will take the view that the rotation had a much less negative effect than I'm indicating. If you take that view AND the idea that "delayed Gazelle" actually exists, then the "Rafa syle" was actually a good thing. If you take that view, but don't buy into "delayed Gazelle", then I suppose it made the lads feel a little less jaded earlier in the season which was nice for them at least.

by **ruskiy playmaker** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:41 am

zarababe wrote:10 points behind - big games to come - let see where this season take us doom gloomers !

It's almost impossible to win the league for us now, but it would really be great if we could manage to beat Arsenal and Man U at their home and get a 3rd place.

by **bigmick** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:42 am

LFC2007 wrote:I refer you to Paco De Miguel.

Perhaps you will have to help me out LFC with a quote or something. Needless to say however, whoever he is and whatever his views are he will never ever convince me that "Rafa style" was and is a good idea

No, the way to go is the way we are going towards seemingly now. Pick a settled team and formation, and largely stick to it. Simple really.

by **god_bless_john_houlding** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:47 am

I personally don't think rotation makes you any fresher in all honesty. If you play 90 minutes one week, then not at all the following then another 90 minutes, you're going to be more worn out because it's stop start and trying to get to grips with the pace of a game. But if you're playing well week in week out your confidence will take you through the games without tiring. Plus players nowadays don't tire after 90 minutes of football. They tire because they :censored:

off to do adverts and fashion parades.

by **LFC2007** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:50 am

bigmick wrote:
LFC2007 wrote:I refer you to Paco De Miguel.

Perhaps you will have to help me out LFC with a quote or something. Needless to say however, whoever he is and whatever his views are he will never ever convince me that "Rafa style" was and is a good idea

Our fitness coach :laugh:

by **account deleted by request** » Mon Mar 10, 2008 1:51 am

Bad Bob wrote:
bigmick wrote: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.

Some good points there, Mick, with respect to 4-2-3-1. On your first point, I have been encouraged in the last couple of games with the way decent shooting chances from just outside the area have fallen to one of the CM "2". As it happened, those chances fell to Mascherano against West Ham and Lucas against Newcastle. Unfortunately, Masch, for all of his other amazing qualities, can't seem to hit the a.rse-end of a donkey with a banjo when shooting and Lucas has shown a heavy touch and a waywardness of shot in those positions of late. So, the spaces are there but you're correct in suggesting that we need to see more of Alonso running into them than we have done.

On the issue of a creative winger, I agree again. For all of Babel's progress of late he is still very one footed, very direct and hence highly predictable. 19 times out of 20 he's going to cut inside from the left flank onto his right foot, shape to shoot, push it to the side when the defender dives in, and leather the ball goalward from there. It won't be long before defenders start showing him onto his left foot and refusing to bite on the shimmy and then what will we see from the lad? Hopefully he'll add more tricks to his locker but a part of me has my doubts. And he's the most creative goal threat we have from out wide, unless you count Kewell, which most of us are declining to do any longer. Pennant, to be fair, has more tricks up his sleeve but his final ball isn't always dependable, he doesn't carry much of a goal threat himself and I question his match intelligence a good deal of the time. So, you're spot on when you say we need someone better for at least one of those positions.

Perhaps there's a compromise available out there? A creative attacker who can effectively play in one of the 'wide' berths in a 4-2-3-1 but who also could fill the 'creative second striker' brief in a 4-4-2. Someone with a better scouting sense than I have can surely draft up a short list?

One player that I think might be worth the money and according to Dawson could well be available is Van Persie off Arsenal.

He is a more than adequate replacement if Torres was injured, would work well with Torres if played together, and may in time drop back and become the creative second striker we are looking for. He is fast, has good vision and skill, decent in the air and a more than competent finisher. Depending on price I would add him to my list of desirables (Diego, Aguero)

Not the versatile winger/second striker you were looking for mate but a cracking player. Aimar would be in the category you suggest, as he can play wide or central, just a bit small and maybe not as quick as he once was. Fantastic vision and passing ability but maybe doesn't score enough goals?

Liverpool FC Forum

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

Who is online