Liverpool FC Forum

GYBS wrote:

Owzat wrote:In PES I play much the Liverpool formation, except I play one DM and two attacking midfielders in a triangle. I play Mascherano at RB, Agger at LB, Alonso in the DM role and Gerrard LAM, with Benayoun RAM - CFs/WFs being Babel, Torres and Kuyt from right to left. That way I have Gerrard and Kuyt link up on the left, with right foot shooting, and the opposite side/foot for Benayoun and Babel. It gives me defensive solidity with no lack of pace or dribbling in attacking areas. Again I'm not too worried as to whether Alonso is DM or CM, in fact I think you can redefine the position without moving players although I'm not sure if it makes any more difference than discussing it on here!

Sorry mate but your post must loose a bit of creditbility when you start comparing how you play the liverpool formation on a computer game 

I was demonstrating the point that it's merely a label, whether the player at the back of a diamond is a CM or a DM makes no difference to what he actually does or his skills. The fact that you can leave a player in the same starting point on a pitch and choose whether to call him a DM or CM shows how little it really matters. As little as it matters whether you call Torres a striker, centre forward, attacker or whatever. Or the pointless debate about whether Gerrard is a midfielder or second striker.

But you're right, I shouldn't possibly mention a computer game when discussing football. I think it's absurd to suggest a post should "loose credibility" because it mentioned a video game. Oh no, I've lost all credibility because I mentioned reality and make believe in the same post I wasn't suggesting Liverpool should play like that, nor that what happens on PES reflects how Liverpool play.

Sabre - I was making a point, valid or not, with regards formations and how little difference there is in a name. I find it laughable you pick up on PES, knock it for being of Japanese origin, yet make no mention (nor did GYBS highlight it) that I mentioned football management games either. A formation is a formation, a role a role, whether it is in the Premiership at Anfield in real life or on a games console/PC. Maybe my mistake was in thinking that posts on a forum should be judged on the point made, not arbitrarily judged because they refer to something the high and mighty think devalues or discredits them by association.

I saw Sabre was last post in this thread, came in expecting an intelligent addition to the topic rather than his post and GYBS' picking up on a triviality with the glee a seven year old might get when their teaching makes a mistake.

Sabre wrote:Football is not about setting some statistical parameters to your virtual player and programming a couple of patterns of collective movement of players. Football Manager and PES are nice to spend a rainy afternoon when you have time, never a place to test your football theories.

If Football Manager was a realistic game, I would have never promoted Worcester City from conference leagues to the premier league. I have done it because I know a pattern to be succesful in a game, not because I know about what a real football team requires.

Bollox   

I've been Liverpools manager for 8 years , have won 7 premiership titles and 8 Champions League titles , better still I sold an aging Kuyt to Aston Villa for £16 million and you're telling me I don't know what i'm doing !

      

Sabre wrote:

Owzat wrote:

Sabre wrote:but I agree the PES comment in the last post doesn't really provide a valid point by itself.

It's part of a post, not "by itself". It was never intended to be "this is how I do it on PES, this is how it is - case closed" There is of course a certain irony that neither of your's or GYBS's posts add anything to the debate itself

Come on. I mean, it's ok you don't consider worthy my opinions, I can live with that opinion.

But at least admit football computer games cannot be used as valid points partially or completely.

Artificial Ingelligence is a part of the computer science that is light years away of the human mind, so you can program patterns of "behaviour" based on trees (trees as in data structures), but you won't fully emulate the game of football when 11 human minds work as a team.

Football is not about setting some statistical parameters to your virtual player and programming a couple of patterns of collective movement of players. Football Manager and PES are nice to spend a rainy afternoon when you have time, never a place to test your football theories.

If Football Manager was a realistic game, I would have never promoted Worcester City from conference leagues to the premier league. I have done it because I know a pattern to be succesful in a game, not because I know about what a real football team requires.


That was my point, not to give stick to your posts as a whole, but anyway, no problem to live with the idea I don't provide anything with my posts. One must assume what he writes won't be good for everybody. And sometimes for nobody! 

woof woof ! wrote:

Sabre wrote:Football is not about setting some statistical parameters to your virtual player and programming a couple of patterns of collective movement of players. Football Manager and PES are nice to spend a rainy afternoon when you have time, never a place to test your football theories.

If Football Manager was a realistic game, I would have never promoted Worcester City from conference leagues to the premier league. I have done it because I know a pattern to be succesful in a game, not because I know about what a real football team requires.

Bollox   

I've been Liverpools manager for 8 years , have won 7 premiership titles and 8 Champions League titles , better still I sold an aging Kuyt to Aston Villa for £16 million and you're telling me I don't know what i'm doing !

      

An heres me thinkin Rafa was good , Jib him an get Sir Woof in, Only a few extra marrow bones an a lampost that should swing it 

s@int wrote:Its seems obious to me that some people are failing to grasp that its not just a name for a position its the ROLE  that the player suits and has been given.

For further reading and education I would recommend this series of articles which although from an Arsenal site is both illuminating and educational. (be warned its long!) It even explains why the british havent got as good technique as the foreign players. It gives the thoughts of the great "thinking managers" etc etc LINK TO ARTICLES Explains why Gerrard no longer plays CM etc etc.

It is educational, but may I say for beginners?

It seems that names like Helenio Herrera, and concepts like the positional game or specialised footballer are vanguard football, but I thought it was common knowledge for anyone who loved this game. Sacchi and Cruyff had indeed a lot of impact around here. But here we go, it's nice to rediscover Sachi and Cruyff, even if it's on the surface.

The blog seems to explain that

The increased technicality of players means the playmaker role is for everyone. Box-to-box midfielders cannot dictate games the same way as someone like Fabregas so playmakers are now dropped back and some are even deep-lying playmakers.

Play-maker is someone able to dictate the tempo, and in such ability, we can have players as different as Fabregas, or Merida (I wonder if he'll make it in Arsenal) , and guys like Alonso.

For that, of course you need quality, as  Sacchi notes, lower in the blog

“But that’s reactionary football. It doesn’t multiply the players’ qualities exponentially. Which actually is the point of tactics: to achieve this multiplier effect on the players’ abilities. In my football, the regista – the playmaker – is whoever had the ball. But if you have Makelele, he can’t do that.

Of course he can't. Makelele was a slightly overrated player in England. Sacchi was spot on aswell to explain why Madrid didn't click.

So, if playmaker is the way the blog you read has to describe a player with that ability, yes, you could say Alonso is a deep lying play-maker. If you think Alonso's role hadn't the typical tasks of a holding midfielder in the very Arrigo Sacchi mold, then I have to disagree. But not only me, who I'm a mere football fan, Pako Aiestaran will disagree too.

Play-maker then, could be Alonso, and could be a totally different player like Guardiola, as mighty mo recalls. The difference between our deep play maker and Guardiola is that Guardiola had not the defensive duties in Cruyff's Barcelona Alonso has. Guardiola was a deep lying playmaker according to this definition, but he was never a holding midfielder. Xavi would be another play-maker, but totally different player in tasks and approach to football than our Alonso. And of course not as deep.

But it's still a nomenclature thing, you can call it play-maker, you can call it regista as sacchi does (means the one who rules) but it's referring to certain ability of the player, the ability to dictate.

Thanks for the link it was a good read anyway, and it's refreshing to see some journos or pundits do look to Europe to learn other tendencies. It's a healthy sign.

I'm not sure though if I agree some of the conclussions the blogger says. I'm uncertain Rafa won't use Gerrard as CM again and will fix him in the current position, especially if we bring someone to play behind Torres. I'd say in fact that Rafa liked the Gerrard-Alonso partnership in the begin of the season as much as any other. In fact he ideally brought a player like Keane so the initial idea for this season wasn't apparently to repeat the Gerrard-Torres partnership.

Anyhow, not a problem. From now on I'll consider Alonso a deep lying playmaker, with defensive, covering and balance duties. No problem to name him like that!