Tactics geeks of the world unite...

While I understand your point mate, surely that's where the defensive midfielders come in? Lucas moves across to cover while Gerrard and Henderson shuffle back( run back in Henderson's case ) to take up the central position, in a similar fashion to the way Masch always moved out to the wide areas while the less mobile Alonso took up the central position.

Certainly I would not be expecting SAS to drop back but with Lucas, Gerrard AND Henderson I don't really see much of a problem with cover.

I think you got a little spoiled with Kuyt but most wide players (Moses, Riera, Downing etc) don't really track back that willingly anyway. In fact when you think of Dossena some of our fullbacks haven't been too willing to track back either!

It's a good point about Masch but the key difference was that we had Stevie playing the 10 role behind a number rather than a 10 playing behind two additional strikers. And I'm not sure that Lucas has the mobility to get out wide mate, same goes for Stevie.

I think that the only way to get a set up where by you can play Sturridge and Suarez as strikers with Coutinho in behind is to continue with the 3-5-2 (or 3-4-1-2) or to play a 4-4-2 diamond.

My preference would be for one of the combinations i put up a few posts back.

It's a good point about Masch but the key difference was that we had Stevie playing the 10 role behind a number rather than a 10 playing behind two additional strikers. And I'm not sure that Lucas has the mobility to get out wide mate, same goes for Stevie.

I think that the only way to get a set up where by you can play Sturridge and Suarez as strikers with Coutinho in behind is to continue with the 3-5-2 (or 3-4-1-2) or to play a 4-4-2 diamond.

My preference would be for one of the combinations i put up a few posts back.

Would you agree though, as I do and Brendan has said (regarding the available players), that currently the 3-4-1-2 makes the best of what we have and until we get someone in, perhaps in January, that we're likely to stick with it? Or would you think the return of Coutinho/Johnson means the return to previous formations?

I would say that Brendan has earned a lot of points with me for switching it up and getting the best out of his group, starting to show the adaptability that some, including myself, feared he may not have.

It's a good point about Masch but the key difference was that we had Stevie playing the 10 role behind a number rather than a 10 playing behind two additional strikers. And I'm not sure that Lucas has the mobility to get out wide mate, same goes for Stevie.

I think that the only way to get a set up where by you can play Sturridge and Suarez as strikers with Coutinho in behind is to continue with the 3-5-2 (or 3-4-1-2) or to play a 4-4-2 diamond.

My preference would be for one of the combinations i put up a few posts back.

Fair enough mate, but in all honesty I don't really see Suarez/Coutinho and Moses in your formation doing much tracking back, plus you will lose the benefit of the SAS partnership that has been developing.

We will have to agree to disagree mate

The only issue with the 3-4-1-2 is how the 4 can work tracking back. What we saw the last game which palace tried was to take out the right wing back. give him space to play.. take the ball off him and counter through his side.. Only issue was that because Hendo was playing, he had the mobility, the pace to cover and in case beaten, he can still chase back. Can't say the same for Lucas, agreed with the post above that he lacks mobility. Even Allen could work with his pace.. Another issue is the No 10 role, we did see Coutinho worked back trying to win the ball back a few times in his first few games and is always improving on that aspect


If cout can improve and add a defensive dimension to that area.. i'm sure we won't have problems..


Maybe we can do a 3-1-3-1-2. Means we have lucas really sitting back with gerrard in midfield together with the wingbacks, no 10 and 2 strikers. The 2 strikers love to roam..

Fair enough mate, but in all honesty I don't really see Suarez/Coutinho and Moses in your formation doing much tracking back, plus you will lose the benefit of the SAS partnership that has been developing.

We will have to agree to disagree mate

I dunno mate, Suarez is hard working off the ball, he might not track back miles but he presses well and would give you enough from a defensive point of view. As for the partnership, I think you can still have a partnership without playing an out an put two up top. For example if you played Sturridge in a narrow high right position with Suarez in a more central area they would still link up and interchange plenty. We already saw a partnership developing last season without having to see them both playing in more central roles.

Would you agree though, as I do and Brendan has said (regarding the available players), that currently the 3-4-1-2 makes the best of what we have and until we get someone in, perhaps in January, that we're likely to stick with it? Or would you think the return of Coutinho/Johnson means the return to previous formations?

I would say that Brendan has earned a lot of points with me for switching it up and getting the best out of his group, starting to show the adaptability that some, including myself, feared he may not have.

I'm with you mate, Using the current formation made perfect sense and kudos to the manager for playing it. We've got no fit right back, a surplus of decent centre-halves and an opportunity to play Suarez and Sturridge as an out and put front two without the shackles of defensive responsibility.

As for sticking with it until January, I don't think so, I suspect that once Jonno is back we will see a return to a back four. I think 3 at the back can work in patches or for specific games. I remember Rafa using it from time to time, in fact I remember a 3-6-1 against the bar codes at St James and we won by four/five goals playing this way. Kenny also used it to great effect on a few occasions, I remember watching us at Stanford Bridge in Torres first game for them and we used 3-5-2 to great effect that day. BUT over a longer period of games we will get found put defensively I think and the domination of possession that Rodgers believes in so passionately is difficult with the players we have available ie. Enrique and Henderson might get up and down and be grafters but they are very limited players going forward, particularly if they are your only players allocated to play wide. And despite playing better in our last game Moses really isn't suited to playing the AMF role in this set-up, I don't think he has the guile or technical ability to make it work.

And don't forget we have just beaten arguably the two worst sides in the league in Sunderland and Palace so it would be hasty to say that this is the way forward until the new year I think

Hmmm, I think our best team looks more like this in a fluid 4-3-3.
 
-------------------------Mignolet------------------------
 
Johnson------------Agger-----------Toure-------------Enrique
 
------Henderson--------Gerrard-----------New CM-----
 
------Coutinho---------Sturridge----------Suarez-------
 
 
Clearly we also have good back-up in Sakho (I hope) and Skrtel in the defence, with Moses able to play in a few positions.
 
Obviously Asapas is terrible, and I don't know much about Alberto, so it's clear where we could do with some more investment: at CM where we need some authority and power and probably also more attacking options to support Coutinho.
 
Frankly, it's almost a waste of time attempting to put Suarez into any formation, as he generally just plays where he wants and pops up all over that forward line, out wide and dropping deep.

With 3 Cb and 2 Wingbacks do we need 2 DM in Gerrard and lucas? I would rotate lucas with the other 3 of Henderson, Alberto and Allen (if ever fit) as they have the legs to do the running for Gerrard thus giving Stevie more energy to get a few more shots off on goal and pose a bit more in the way of goals. With 3 CB that should be more than cover to deal with 3 attacking players and if the wingbacks track back we have 5 in defence which is plenty!!!! having say for example henderson or a new midfielder in the team offers more energy so Gerrard doesnt have to sprint back to cover as much as he does now as Lucas is slow.

I think we can talk tactics but tactics can only be about what is best for the players available.


We have a pretty good set of defenders (altho Mignolet is a step down on Pepe). We have a terrific front 2.
The weak spot is the midfield and cover.


 Wingbacks and a back 3 may well minimise the problems of Ste G and Lucas playing lots of games back to back.


We also have the issue of how to accomodate Countinho when he's fit. That would suggest Moses moves to the bench.


So I've got support for a central back 3 + w/backs. But we have to be aware of the limits of the squad.
Now is also a time for Henderson to stake a claim (altho I am not a huge fan of him so far).


Another striker/winger and top quality midfielder in Jan could edge is closer to a  claim for top 4.
Without quality depth and variations, that challenge could disappear very quickly.
So I think the next 6 or 8 games will be interesting.

I think we can talk tactics but tactics can only be about what is best for the players available.


We have a pretty good set of defenders (altho Mignolet is a step down on Pepe). We have a terrific front 2.
The weak spot is the midfield and cover.


 Wingbacks and a back 3 may well minimise the problems of Ste G and Lucas playing lots of games back to back.


We also have the issue of how to accomodate Countinho when he's fit. That would suggest Moses moves to the bench.


So I've got support for a central back 3 + w/backs. But we have to be aware of the limits of the squad.
Now is also a time for Henderson to stake a claim (altho I am not a huge fan of him so far).


Another striker/winger and top quality midfielder in Jan could edge is closer to a  claim for top 4.
Without quality depth and variations, that challenge could disappear very quickly.
So I think the next 6 or 8 games will be interesting.

you really think Mignolet is a step down, i think he's a much better keeper he's getting better at distribution but as far as shot stopping goes and collection i think he's better than pepe and on half his wage packet

you really think Mignolet is a step down, i think he's a much better keeper he's getting better at distribution but as far as shot stopping goes and collection i think he's better than pepe and on half his wage packet

I think the "Pepe makes mistakes was all overhyped bullshit. The Yanks' lackey ie Ayre wanted to trim the wage bill.


Pepe had proved himself as a top class keeper year in, year out. I think only Clemence could compare amongst our previous keepers. I think his distribution is clearly still better than Mignolet's. Also Pepe was a winner - in terms of silverware and also in terms of mentality. And masses of experience.


Many a promising young keeper has disappeared after nerves set in, or had his deficiencies found out. So to me, Mignolet as the only keeper was a very disappointing, finance driven move. I mean we arent exactly paupers amongst world football. Mignolet would have been a great deputy, one for the future.


I think keepers in poor teams often look good, simply because of the amount of saves they must make. AND because their defences arent highly proficient.


Sometimes, PEpe was criticised last year. But I think you need to understand that he was very exacting in terms of what he expected from the def and def midfield. This was a weak spot of Rodgers's team last year.


Mignolet hasnt dropped a load of clangers yes. But it is early days.  Not has he shown himself to be some "megastar in the making".


The whole nature of Pepe's departure (and to me, he is one of our favourite sons, like Ste G and Luis) really left a bad taste in my mouth. Even if Mignolet ends up a success, I'd call it more by luck and financial pressurising from above, than by judgement.


I think we really need think of how Pepe was a keeper AND a leader.

To get back on track and away from the propaganda, has anyone else used the chalkboards on the official site?

I saw them a while back on the Guardian website, but never really used them.

Perhaps someone who is better than I am at this sort of stuff could tell me how to post them up

To get ... away from the propaganda

So is it a day off for you Swab? Or have you got a new employer then? 

So it's a day off for me from trolling the other LFC forums, so I thought I'd come here and spout bollocks as usual.

See now, you're not the only one who can selectively edit

I still like the old stuff
Goalie
2 full backs
1 centre half
right half and left half.
right wing left wing.
inside right inside left
centre forward.

I still like the old stuff
Goalie
2 full backs
1 centre half
right half and left half.
right wing left wing.
inside right inside left
centre forward.

Wonder what the response would be from the opposition if we set up like that one day.  Probably be rolling around laughing their tits off.
Ramseys fault, he started the changes with the 4-4-2 in the world cup.

I've been having another think about midfield this morning and what might be the solution, if you think there is a problem that is, and I think the time is to get Allen a game to see if his ability to keep the ball will tighten things up. I also think there might be some merit in having a three again in there and no No.10 with a fluid front three. It would mean abandoning the 3 at the back but maybe it isn't working as well as we'd like as well.

Lucas

Allen  Gerrard

Suarez  Sturridge  Coutinho

Although it would be a 3 in midfield I'd still have Lucas as the base and he would provide the protection for the back four, or two when the full backs get forward, and this allows Gerrard amd Allen to play that bit further up the pitch and link with the floating 3 at the front.

I know Coutinho is best as a 10 and I really am not sure if it's wise to move him from there but with jose getting forward as well as he does you could get Phil inside more often than not as we seen many times last season and with him drfiting you do get more of that element of surprise in his game as he isn't easily tracked.

The same goes for Glen and Suarez on the other side as Glen getting forward allows Luis to drift inside and give us more options in the middle.

Glen and Jose would be my fullbacks as I think they are the two best we have and in this formation I'd play two out and out defenders to give us a solid base as with enough players in front of them we don't need the centre backs to be ball players. Just comfortabe enough to move it on and do their job of defending.

Johnson  Toure  Sakho  Enrique

I normally don't like to drop players in form like Skrtel but one has to lose out and I'd be most comfortabel with Kolo and Sakho as a pair.

Still gets our best players all on the pitch at the same time but maybe could get a bit more out of them and provide that bit of control we seem to lack at times.

Lots of support for our new 3-5-2 formation up until yesterday but it has all gone a bit quiet since. I just want to really emphasise why it ISN'T the way forward. All sorts of excuses flying about as to why we were poor yesterday. I listened to Federer banging on about the players not trying and not caring which was complete an utter tosh and unproveale tosh at that. Several have sited the international break which was a fair point and it can cost you that extra bit of sharpness both mentally and physically which can make all the difference BUT so much of yesterday's poor showing was down to the set up. It was all wrong. If Johnson was fit enough to start then we should have reverted to a flat back four with Jonno at RB where he belongs. so many issues with the 5 across the middle yesterday.

- First problem is Moses. He can't play the 8 role, not in a million years. His game is all about attacking space and using his power and pace to get after fullbacks. His game isn't about operating in tight spaces, playing triangles because he doesn't have the guile, touch or agility to play in there. He got a lot of stick in the match thread but it wasn't his fault. He should have been playing on the left where he can run at players and cut in on his right foot.

- but by far the biggest problem with this set up is in wide areas. It simply doesn't work. I like Jonno as an attacking player but he is no winger and is far better when he is running into space. And as for Cissoko on the other side, I'm sorry but he is hopeless in that role and Enrique isn't much better. There was simply no threat of any 2 on 1s down either wing. If you play a back four you have the option of the full back joining the attack and giving you natural advantages when they double or overlap with the wide player. Play three at the back and this option is gone because neither of your outside centre-halves in this formation has the freedom to get in touch with the wing back in advanced areas. If a full back bombs on they can do so safely in the knowledge that there are three defenders behind in case he (or the team) loses possession. All Newcasle had to do yesterday was simply funnel our play inside where they had numbers to defend. Our formation played right into their hands. If you are playing against ten men you need to do a few things, you need to move the ball at a quick tempo (we didn't do this), you need to be able to switch play quickly and often (hard to do in a 3-5-2) and you need to take advantage of two on one opportunities (ditto).

The only way to play his formation regularly is the way Venables used it at Euro 96. He played a back three that included 2 full backs (Neville and Pearce) who were both capable and comfortable in space and this enabled the two (so called wing backs) Mcmanaman and Anderton (both genuine wingers you will notice) to do what they do best. And the final piece of the jigsaw was Paul Ince who simply slotted in like a virtual centre-half whenever we lost possession or either of Pearce or Neville had to deal with a problem in wide areas. Unfortunately we are a million miles from being able to do it and despite the obvious benefit of being able to pair Sturridge and Suarez through the middle I would park this formation for the foreseeable future. Fingers crossed Brendan agrees.

I don't think 3-5-2 has worked at all really, the attacker midfielder is absolutely critical and we start using that formation when our best player for that position is injured? Makes no sense to me.

Don't think the wing backs are offensive enough (bar Glen) or technically sound enough for it either. Glen's good at getting forward but his end product is usually pretty poor.

We definitely need a change IMO.

I don't think 3-5-2 has worked at all really, the attacker midfielder is absolutely critical and we start using that formation when our best player for that position is injured? Makes no sense to me.

Don't think the wing backs are offensive enough (bar Glen) or technically sound enough for it either. Glen's good at getting forward but his end product is usually pretty poor.


We definitely need a change IMO.

Despite not being a fan of the formation I completely understand why the gaffer has used it and tbf, 7 point out of 9 isn't so bad. We used it because we had no full backs available, a glut of quality centre halves and the opportunity to partner Sturridge and Suarez up front so it was a logical step HOWEVER Jonno is back now, Coutinho not far behind him and Sturridge and Suarez can play together no matter if one of them operates from a wider start position so it's time to revert to a back four. Play a right footer on the left and vice versa the other side, get our full backs involved in the final 3rd and let a front four of Sturridge, Suarez, Moses and Coutinho cause havoc with their movement.

Scottbot, 3 posts above, good post mate, a lot of sense in there, I am also alarmed that Sissoko was given a start when returning from injury, so not match fit, and out of position. Just can't get my head around B R thinking sometimes. Surely giving him 30 mins at the end to ease him back was the best option.
Do you think he's just trying to out wit the opposing managers with unorthodox set ups or what.?  For whatever reason, It aint working is it !

Scottbot, 3 posts above, good post mate, a lot of sense in there, I am also alarmed that Sissoko was given a start when returning from injury, so not match fit, and out of position. Just can't get my head around B R thinking sometimes. Surely giving him 30 mins at the end to ease him back was the best option.
Do you think he's just trying to out wit the opposing managers with unorthodox set ups or what.?  For whatever reason, It aint working is it !

Cheers fella, I don't think Cissoko looked unfit and I know he has had a few games with the under 21s so perhaps he just decided that Enrique wasn't doing enough at LWB which he wasn't. Only problem is that Cissoko didn't really offer anything extra at the position, he looks almost as one footed as Enrique, is maybe a bit more mobile but ultimately he's a full back who only offers an attacking threat IF he is playing on the overlap rather than being the sole Focus of our attack on the wing as and is the case with this formation.

Hopefully the next. Time we see Cissoko it will be in a traditional full back role although I must confess I'm not all that impressed by the player based on hat I've seen. I'd be surprised if he is anything more than a one year loan option as cover.

I didnt think the performance against Newcastle was really down to the formation. More another case of us struggling to play well for more than half an hour over a game ( we played pretty well the last 30 mins.. The Man U cup game, which ironically we lost, is probably the only game this season were we played reasonably well for 90 minutes.) The reasons for this I am not so sure about, but we have struggled with it so far regardless of formation.

But yeah I still don't like playing 3 at the back. The boottom line is you have an extra CB on instead of a midfielder. If the opposition only play 1 up front, you have 3 CBs standing around 1 striker. So, as Scottbot says, if you play 3 CBs, at least one has to be able to step into midfield. To me it is simpler to just play a midfielder. If the oppostion start alternating between 1 up then 3 up, as is common these days, you have centre backs and wing backs not knowing whether to stick or twist. Whereas for an old fashioned back 4 it only comes down to the full backs pushing up or dropping back, and when they do the latter they dont leave you an extra man short in midfield.

Personally I think he is only playing 3 at the back to get Sahko a game. He has spent £17 million on him, and obviously sees him as the future, so you can understand this. But Sahko doesn't quite look up to speed yet to go straight into a 2 man partnership, and you wouldnt drop either Skrtel or Toure to put him in on current form. So he is bringing him in gently by playing all 3. At some point soon I'm pretty sure he will go back to 4-3-3. He should have the proverbial "nice problem to have" selection headache at CB when he does.