The Woolster

But we have the same players... I don't know about others, but I don't think I ever said that we must only play with 2 sitting midfielders, or that that was the only way that Rodgers will have us play. What I have thought for a long time now is that we have 4 very good midfielders, 3 of which could play in a number of different roles, and I had faith that Rodgers would find the right combination. I would also still not have a problem with Gerrard and Lucas playing together, like many do. I personally think that the problems they had were in some ways of both getting used to playing a bit differently, they would sometimes be covering the same areas for instance or not know where the other was, both of which would improve through practice, but my main guess at their issues was that of the other teams being fitter at the start of the season than us due Rodgers using a periodisation training system, which aims to get us fitter for the 2nd half of the season. This meant they were that little bit slower and weren't able to track back so well, especailly in the 2nd halves of games. If they were to play together now in that same system, I don't think they would have those same issues. But yeah, I think they were and are good enough, and that going out and buying more players isn't always the best solution.

I was almost right... The 2 things I got wrong are that winning the league would not depend on the other teams being a bit crap as City and Chlesea are both on for pretty high totals, I think. The other is that our midfield was even better than I thought! Still think we could do with just 1 more for next season though

Caught up with this thread for the first time in months on Monday, then read this yesterday http://www.theanfieldwrap.com/2014/03/worst-fans-internet/ and it made me think of this thread. The last para especially made me chuckle. Not having a go at anyone, as we all do it...

I think they might actually be masking the drop in wages by putting in some of the pay offs in there. Which is clever, as the Premier League FFP rules limit wages increases to £4m from the new TV money, I think they inflated last seasons to get around that. Not 100% on that yet though, still having a look through.

I only like Caulker and Weimann from that list, but surprised there was not mention for Mulumbu. Would have been happy with any of them last summer. Although Behrahino has since looked good and had potential. For this summer I'd only take Caulker, who has the potential to be a top CB I think, but otherwise our aims are now higher.

Still room for 1 more? PM me if so

Apparently they are both around £8m a year, but I find it hard to believe that as Utd only get a couple of million for similar deals, although it is possible that as they have so many more sponsers it dilutes the value for each one, but I can't believe thats worth £6m. If those amounts are true though, then that is pretty good news.

I have literally only read 3 posts on this page as I haven't looked at this thread for ages, and without wanting to put words in Hotus' mouth, I doubt we could afford Mata due to limit on wage increases allowed under the new Premier League FFP rules which means we can only increase wages by £4m from the new TV money. We can go higher if we've increased revenues from other sources, but with no Europa this season, I doubt we have enough head room for the kind of wages Mata would be on.

I really like him. However I think that Mclaughlin will be better, and that Kelly is better now (just not fit), so not sure if he has a future with us if he wants to play regularly.

Bollocks, stream went just before that last round, got it back as just as it was stopped. Shouldn't have been stopped, but I didn't see what happened to get into that last salvo so didn't see the shots Groves was hit with

Don't think we should go for Hughes. He may well turn out to be top class, I haven't actually seen him to have an opinion, but my feeling is that we've quite a lot of players who play in a similar position between the ages of 23 and 16, and at some point we've got to give these guys a chance and not block people by buying in a similar position at a similar age. Of the guys about 23 we've got Henderson and Allen, think it will be a while until he is good enough to displace either of them. Of the 20-21 year olds we've got Suso, Alberto and Teixeira. Of the 18-20 year olds we've got players like Dunn and Lussey who have shown promise. Clearly they haven't shown as much as Hughes, but they've not had the same opportunites as him, who knows they would have done at Derby. Then there are the 16 to 18 year olds, and in Rossiter who I think is one of the outstanding talents in our academy, and Chirivella who is apparantly also a to prospect. Thats a lot of young midfield talent we already have.

Think we've got a squad big enough, especially with a couple more signings that I am sure we will make, to put a strong team out in the Europa and not play the majority of our first XI. At least for the group stages anyway. We've got players like Kelly, Illori, Allen, Alberto, Sterling and Aspas who aren't getting a game even now, then you've got the likes of Suso, Wisdom, Robinson and Borini to come back from their loans. Chuck in whichever CB out of the 4 isn't starting and we've got a full outfield 10 with a player in each position. Include say 3 new signings, who either go into the first XI meaning someone else drops down, or they are on the fringe of the first team and cna play in the Europa, and I'd say we've got a decent team that is good enough to beat a lot of the teams in the Europa.

I was coming at it from the point of view of 'if we don't get into Champions League, do we want to be in the Europa'. It would be dissapointing, but better to be in it than not in Europe at all.

Europa would give us the chance to really use the squad and give some of our younger fringe players the minutes they need to develop rather than sitting on the bench like a number of them are doing at the moment. It would give some of the older fringe players the chance to play tehmselves into form and challenge for a first XI spot anbd making the first team better. Europa would give us more money to spend on players to improve the team. Under the new Premier League FFP rules, wage increases from the new TV deal are limited at £4m a year, unless you increase revenues from other sources, then you can go above the £4m limit. That means that even if we have funds available to spend on transfers, we may not be able to spend it all as you are limited by wage increase amounts. As we are not in Europa this season, getting in next season would give us maybe another £10m in prize money, TV money and ticket sales that we could put towards wages for 2 or 3 top class players. As Xerxes says, it would give our less experienced players a chance to getused to playing European footy as well as perhaps playing twice a week. Being in Europe would make us a more attrative proposition for potential signings. Finally, from 2015, the winners of the Europa will qualify for the Champions League.

Like I said, every tackle should be thought of succesful event, the success % of tackles is a misnomer in terms of these stats. The tackle stat does not tell us how 'good' Lucas is or Sidwell or any other player are either, and at no point did I say it does. They are not irrelevant though, they can be used with other info to help build a picture of what a player does and how good they are. I do think it is impressive that Lucas tackles (as in takes the ball away from the man in possession) more than any other play in Europe's top 5 leagues though. And being 8th in the league in interceptions per game is pretty decent. They don't mean he is a good player by themselves though EDIT: For some reason I thought your post was quoting mine, so of course your comments about Sidwell may not have been aimed at me.

He's not missing them though, we just aren't getting the ball after he's won the tackle, part of that is perhaps down to how he is winning the tackle, but part will be down to his team mates not being there to back him up. http://basstunedtored.com/2013/10/01/the-truth-about-tackles/ Looks like I misremembered how they account for tackles that go out of play though.

Don't think you read it right.

Last season Lucas won a tackle (in the Opta sense) more often than any other player in the league who played more then 450 even attempted a tackle, bar Steve Sidwell.

In terms of Opta definitions (I'm assuming its their stat), every single tackle, in the strictest sense, is actually a tackle that has been won. What defines their 'tackle won %' is what happens to the ball after the tackle. For it to be a tackle, the person who has made the tackle must disposses the person who had the ball, which is what I mean by it being a tackle won. If after the player has been dispossesed the ball remains in the tacklers teams possession, it is a tackle won. If after the player has been dispossesed, it goes back to the player who was tackled team, it is a tackle lost. That means if you win a tackle but the ball goes out of play for a thow, it is classed as a tackle lost. A players tackle win % is also therefore often dependent on his team mates around him winning the loose ball.

If someone not as eternally positive as you pointed that out, I'd say we've won 3 points from 2 of those games already so only need 11 from 9. In the same games last season, with a worse attack and defence, we managed to get 9 points. Not such a big increase.

Slight error, looked at the wrong number in my spreadsheet, we got 10 points against the top 6 last season rather than 12, but my point still stands.

Before the Fulham game I saw a stat saying that of the last 38 games that Lucas and Gerrard have started together, we had won 72 points. Thats top 4 standard. We've played 9 games against teams not thought of as top 7, we've scored 20 points, so 2.2 a game. If we keep that up in the other 17 games against this level, we'll have about 57-58 points. That means that from our 12 games against the other top 6 teams we'd probably only need 14 points unless we are unlucky, so 1.2 points a game. We've already got 3 of those 14 points. Last season with a weaker attack and weaker defence, we got 12 points against those teams, so with the improvements to those areas, I think the same midfield is more than capable of getting 14.

http://differentgame.wordpress.com/2012/08/18/things-to-watch-differently-in-the-premier-league-this-season-1-corners/ Things to watch differently in the Premier League this season #1 – Corners Posted on August 18, 2012by differentgame Manchester United took more corners than any other team bar Liverpool in the EPL last season. They also scored 20% of their goals from headers. On top of this only Blackburn and Manchester City scored more goals from set-pieces than United. For these reasons Differentgame thought they’d be the team with the best corner statistics to have a look at to set some things straight. Actually, mainly just one thing: “How can a professional footballer not even beat the first man from a corner?” Firstly, we split the penalty area in half, drawing a line from the centre of the goal, through the penalty spot to the edge of the box. Anything met by a player in the nearest half to the corner taker was deemed ‘near post’. Anything in the other half was deemed ‘far post’. Short corners or those teed up for the man around the D were deemed, erm, ‘short corners’ (for ease). Over the season United swung in 137 near post corners, 51 far post corners and quite surprisingly (to non-United fans like us at least) took 92 short corners. Unless professional footballers are even more woefully inaccurate than most think, they’re hitting near post corners on purpose. They’re therefore deliberately increasing the risk of not clearing the first man. But why? Only 2 corners out of 280 were met directly by a header that went straight in the goal. And they were both near post corners. In all, United scored 10 goals originating from corners. 4 from near post corners, 3 from far post corners and 3 from short corners. Those figures suggest that they should have taken less near post corners, surely? It’s not until we break each one down that we see a reason why maybe they didn’t. We’ve already stated that of the 4 near post ones, 2 only needed one touch to score.The other 2 need just two touches each (a flick then the finishing touch) before ending up in the net. 4 goals, 6 touches. The 3 far post corner goals needed 8 interventions in total to find their way into the net. The first required 3 United players to win headers after the initial corner. The second was a simple cushioned lay-off. The third was headed out of the box by a defender, the ball landing to a United player who fed it wide to then be smashed home. The 3 short corners goals required 13 interventions. Two of these United remained in control of -intricate short passes before the ball was eventually played into the box. The first one however, involved Nani beating two men, getting tackled, the ball coming out to Michael Carrick, him firing in a shot, the shot getting blocked and Javier Hernandez firing in the rebound. Near post corners therefore offer the shortest route to goal. Once the initial corner kick is taken it minimises the risk of multiple players having to find each other in the box when heavily marked. There’s less luck needed for a goal to happen. Short corner routines retain possession until a better angle for a cross is reached and gives time for defenders to be pulled out of position. It shortens the odds of a goal happening. Far post corners almost seem like a lottery in comparison given the examples. Only 1 in 50 was a simple knock back across goal before someone put it in. Nobody stuck a far post corner straight in the net. So next time you hear someone say “just get it in the box” after a short corner, or “he can’t even beat the first man” once a near post corner is cleared, you’ll know better than to nod in agreement. Players are deliberately targeting the area, and anything over-hit is generally a waste of time. Follow me on twitter here.

I saw someone on twitter say something along the lines of "Its the attack and defence that win you games, and its the midfield that wins you big games", and I think there is a lot of truth in that. For this season, our realistic aim is to get into the top 4, and our midfield is perfectly good enough for that. It might well be that that we could end up challenging for the title this season, but that will be due the other top teams being a bit crap. If we become flat track bullies and simply win the games against the teams that aren't as good as us, we sould end up top 4 even if we don't take many points off the teams around us, but to win the title, you need to be beating your rivals as well. For next season, when we are in the Champions League and looking to win the title, then our midifled could do with another worldclass player in there.

Telegraph had extracts from that new book Red Machine, this one had me laughing out loud on the train more interesting stuff in the article http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/10366731/Liverpool-FC-book-extract-Bruce-Grobbelaar-on-how-he-broke-Steve-McMahons-nose-...-twice-in-one-night.html