Rodgers explains tactical approach

Didn't work in the first half, did it?

 

I'm not knocking the second half perfomance or the result, obviously. But we struggled badly in midfield in the first half.

 

So, what changed at half time? Sterling came on shortly into the second half and played well. Anything else? Allen and/or Henderson dropping deeper?

I'm probably going to be in a minority of one but I didn't particularly like the system against Southampton. i thought we won because we had the better finishers not the better system as Southampton were on top until we scored the second and they could easily have been two up at half-time.

 

I've no doubt the sysyem could work if Coutinho is on song but I really don't want to see it in away games.

I haven't watched a replay of the game, but at the time the impression I got was that in the first half Allen and Henderson were both getting pulled very wide and that left Gerrard too exposed in the middle, meaning Lallana had too much room.

 

The second half it looked like Allen and Henderson were tucked in a bit more, (perhaps because Johnson and Flanagan were told to not go forward and leave any gaps) and we had far more control of them and I can barely remember them posing any threat at all after the break.

 

I definitely think Rodgers tweaked something at half time because all the problems we'd been having seemed to disappear in the second half.

Sorry, I hate doubting Rodgers, but I'm not convinced. If the idea was to dominate the middle of the field, we failed. 

 

If the plan was to cede majority possession, allow their fullbacks into advanced positions so as to isolate their CBs, use the extra body we had to somewhat negate delivery from those wide areas, then it was a roaring success.

 

It was an experiment that had as many positive as negatives though, and Rodgers will have learnt something from it.

Sorry, I hate doubting Rodgers, but I'm not convinced. If the idea was to dominate the middle of the field, we failed. 

 

 

Exactly. They strolled through us in the first half. At least he was honest about what he was attempting, but it didn't work.

 

Still, a win's a win.

Exactly. They strolled through us in the first half. At least he was honest about what he was attempting, but it didn't work.

 

Still, a win's a win.

 

It very clearly worked in the second half, though.

 

Still, a win's a win and we'll take them anyway they come. 3-0 in a game we dominated sounds good to me.

I haven't watched a replay of the game, but at the time the impression I got was that in the first half Allen and Henderson were both getting pulled very wide and that left Gerrard too exposed in the middle, meaning Lallana had too much room.

 

The second half it looked like Allen and Henderson were tucked in a bit more, (perhaps because Johnson and Flanagan were told to not go forward and leave any gaps) and we had far more control of them and I can barely remember them posing any threat at all after the break.

 

I definitely think Rodgers tweaked something at half time because all the problems we'd been having seemed to disappear in the second half.

Exactly the way I see it. They were too advanced for most of the first half, and because Gerrard's relative lack of recovery pass (when chasing down quick players) it allowed them to cause us some problems. Second half, he obviously spotted that. I said on here at HT that 'this is where a manager earns his money', and in my opinion he did. It was better even before Coutinho came off. Much better balance. Of course, having rarely played it, it's not a surprise it took a half of football to get it right.

 

I'm guessing we won't actually see too much of it though.

To me it looked like it worked a treat until we scored our first goal, which was for 16 minutes. heh. Then i think it was a combination of us inviting them a bit more to create more space for the counter, misplacing a lot of longer passes, and Sotuhampton obviously getting a kick up their arse from going 1 goal down that lead to them having more success in their pressing. It's a very common reaction. Second half was a great display though

We can argue about how well this set-up worked, but the proof that it worked to some extent is the win & the clean sheet (remember those?). Another plus is that it yet another way for LFC to play (& counter the oppos) with essentially the same line up.  No one can say for sure how we will set up from just reading the team sheet.

Ferguson was right when he said you're as good as your strikers. Ours are very good. Any tactical approach that gets them in scoring positions on a regular basis is good.

Sorry, I hate doubting Rodgers, but I'm not convinced. If the idea was to dominate the middle of the field, we failed.

 

If the plan was to cede majority possession, allow their fullbacks into advanced positions so as to isolate their CBs, use the extra body we had to somewhat negate delivery from those wide areas, then it was a roaring success.

 

It was an experiment that had as many positive as negatives though, and Rodgers will have learnt something from it.

You saying Gerrard was wrong when he said Brendan got the tactics spot on?

You saying Gerrard was wrong when he said Brendan got the tactics spot on?

 

I'm saying I'm unconvinced that the tactics were the primary reason for the win, that's all.

 

Gerrard also said the plan was to play a bit longer, which doesn't really go hand-in-hand with the idea of dominating the middle of the field as per Rodgers' initial intention.

I'm saying I'm unconvinced that the tactics were the primary reason for the win, that's all.

 

Gerrard also said the plan was to play a bit longer, which doesn't really go hand-in-hand with the idea of dominating the middle of the field as per Rodgers' initial intention.

All I remember is Gerrard saying "The credit goes to the manager getting the tactics absolutely spot on" He admited they were a bit over run in the first half as they were getting used to it as it wasn't something they had played in a match before.

 

Second half with the change of Coutinho for Sturridge was the key point, Coutinho gave it away far too often and when he did the holes were their to be exploited. That change and the addition of better ball retention by those in the midfield made the tactics work perfecly like Gerrad pointed out.

It's hard to know what's being referenced, because "tactics" is such a catch-all term, but I found the two comments a bit out of synch. When I heard Gerrard talk of the longer game I assumed the plan was to replicate the derby - let them press and hit them with pace. Then I read Rodgers' comments about dominating the middle and it seems a bit contradictory.

 

I just think that more's being made of the switch to a diamond formation than is necessary.

 

As a counterpoint, I'd argue we didn't lose at home because we played the wrong formation then, the personnel placed in the formation had a greater bearing. 

Coutinho was a big factor for the problems in the first half imo, his role is the most important, its the constant outlet the other 3 midfielders will use, and he constantly gave the ball away and had arguably his worst performance in a red shirt.(To be expected though, brilliant talent just simply experience needed that he will get over time)

 

Agree though Rodgers tweaked it and got Henderson and Allen closer to Gerrard in the second half that helped. 

 

IMO, the tactics were spot another big call in a growing list from Rodgers that he got right 

I called the midfield diamond last week, it seemed like a good idea because Southampton love packing the midfield. That said, it didn't work great because we didn't create much until Sterling came on, albeit at the head of the diamond.

 

Against United, I don't have the same fear of losing control of the game. That said, they're going to go at us hard.

 

United full backs are there to be had on toast, so we need the 433 in this case.

Personally this is something that I dislike about Rodgers.

 

I prefer managers to keep their cards close to their chest as far as tactics are concerned.

 

If he constantly keeps revealing what he wanted to do and his ideas he will make it a lot easier for the opposition to get one over on us in the future. 

 

In the first half Southampton were the better team. We were only ahead due to the reactions and brilliance of Suarez. Maybe this is why Rodgers feels he has to justify it, but I'd rather he didn't.  

I don't think Rodgers will get caught out tactically. When he was professing the whole death by football approach last season, he had us passing non stop and we were very much a possession based team akin to Swansea, this season there's been an evolution, and the other teams are only just now getting onto it.

 

Teams have been setting up to play a possession team, press them high, control the ball and win the game. What they actually play against is a fast counter attacking team with great movement in the final third. Martinez got done a kipper at Anfield because he thought it was straight shootout between us and them for possession, dominate the midfield, dominate the game. He got completely overrun in the final third, and got bummed by our fast counter attacks.... too clinical, too quick and the movement is so diverse between the front three that it's very difficult to stop unless your playing deep.

Personally this is something that I dislike about Rodgers.

 

I prefer managers to keep their cards close to their chest as far as tactics are concerned.

 

If he constantly keeps revealing what he wanted to do and his ideas he will make it a lot easier for the opposition to get one over on us in the future. 

 

In the first half Southampton were the better team. We were only ahead due to the reactions and brilliance of Suarez. Maybe this is why Rodgers feels he has to justify it, but I'd rather he didn't.  

 

Maybe he's making a bit of a deal with it as it's the opposite way he intends to play at Man Utd?

Perhaps Moyes is paying attention and thinking up ways to drill the Mancs into coping with our two centre forwards and midfield diamond, then we will bam them with a 433 rocket up the arse?

Personally this is something that I dislike about Rodgers.

 

Judging by you many comments about Rodgers in the past, I doubt it's the only think you dislike.

Going on last night, the subject of this thread should have been related to him giving a tutorial to the England manager.

 

So, Roy, this is a ball.

 

 

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/brendan-rodgers-says-legacy-liverpool-6782793

Rodgers: My legacy at Liverpool FC will be Reds' young stars

Well, he's certainly starting them young.

Had to do a double take, I thought someone photoshopped Wilshere in a Liverpool shirt.

Had to do a double take, I thought someone photoshopped Wilshere in a Liverpool shirt.

 

hahaha

Judging by you many comments about Rodgers in the past, I doubt it's the only think you dislike.

 

I have never been overly critical of Rodgers?

 

During/After his first season I said that I thought we needed to see a big improvement on a disappointing first season. My main concerns were a lack of results in the big games, and an inability to string a run of results together.

 

He has surpassed my expectations with the thumping results we have had over Spurs,Arsenal and Everton and he has got us consistently winning matches too.The fact that he picks the team on merit and has players fighting for their place is something that's been needed for a long time and is working brilliantly too.He has really impressed me with the way that he has adapted our playing style to get the best out of the players we have here at present. 

 

He does irritate me at times with certain interviews, but that's no big deal, and I'm still a bit concerned transfer wise as only Sturridge and Coutinho have proved to be good signings so far, but overall he is doing an outstanding job as we are playing the best football I have seen in my lifetime.