Do We Need To Become More Direct To Succeed?

I've been thinking about his for a few weeks now and the way the league has been this season, and even last, with the 'lower' teams becoming much stronger and more capable of beating the so called top sides.

The likes of Stoke, Palace, Leicester, Watford and others can sign better players than ever before and the middle tier of clubs can and have closed he gap to the top albeit not quite enough to seriously challenge for honours.

We have always struggled to beat these sides, especially at home, and the most success against them I can recall was during Brendan's run to second place where we did play a more direct counter attacking style of football.

Is the key to winning the league becoming a little more direct and a little less subtle because passing around and trying to draw this type of opposition out hasn't succeeded for us over the years so should we play two strikers and at least one wide player and try something different to win against the 'lesser' sides and build up points that will help towards a title challenge?

I'm not advocating a long ball style but I think this league has changed and we need to find a formula to beat sides outside the traditional big clubs in order to win the title.

Not sure what we need to succeed mate. All I know is that any team can beat any other team on any given day no matter what the tactics or formations are.

I'm sick of fearing these lower teams being capable of embarrasiing us and hope Jürgen is the man to change it once and for all. These cu*ts should be shaking in their boots when they look at the fixture list and they see our name.

Simple answer, no.

We went long ball early on this season with Brendan and the reason it failed was largely down to the midfield getting out battled. We need stronger players in there, right now we have nobody who can hold the ball in tight spaces and pick a defense splitting pass. We have people who can hit raking balls out to the wide areas but actual dinks or straight accurate at pace delivery we simply don't have the technicians.

So we have to condense the space, get our less capable midfielders closer to their box where they might be able to hurt them on a more regular occasion. Then the problem becomes movement up top, if you don't have people moving once they are in 2 banks of 4 then it's simple, by the book defending. So what does Jürgen do, honestly he buys better players, able to play in the latter of the two systems because I'd rather not watch us play like Villa.

Too many of our players are incapable of beating a man in a 1v1 situation in the middle of the park. Can is the only one who has the strength to burst past players but then the rest of his game is currently far too erratic. In time he may become an option but right now he's being asked to do it too early.

Unfortunately for now we'll look unbalanced and disjointed on many occasions because our players simply do not compliment each other in any style and it's why there were many calls that certain players "do not fit" and this is what we're finding.

Just need better players, especially in midfield an area that was neglected for too long by the previous incumbent.

We need the same intensity, guts and team spirit as these "lesser" teams. If we can match them in commitment then we'll beat them with our skill.

we have a pattern of play that has long been established as a club and it never included direct football as a concept. We have been passing and moving for over 50 years what we don't have now is a Roger Hunt an Ian Rush or a Luis Suarez.

Just need better players, especially in midfield an area that was neglected for too long by the previous incumbent.

Our midfielders have for sometime been goal shy and its not even ok for Lucas not to score a couple of goals each season we just need to score far more goals and concede fewer goals

Good OP.

The Gerrard/Torres pairing were direct, and if we had the calibre of those two upfront then an emphatic YES would be my answer. As it is, we don't have the quality in a striker to get in channels and run behind the defence with the turbo boosters on supplied by a pin pointed Gerrard through ball.

The closest we have is Sturridge, ala Southampton, who has the movement, pace and finishing to rely upon but we all know he is about as reliable as a car made in France.

The other style of directness that a player like Benteke may tempt, would have to be a no from me. And this wouldn't even solve our fundamental problems IMO.

Similar to Arsenal, we've become pansies somewhat on the field who don't fancy the fight of earning the right to play. While the Leicester's and Watford's will scrap and ruffle the feathers of their opponents and use their quality thereafter, we've become accustomed to mincing around about shirking the dirty work.

We need a destroyer in midfield, Mascha, Sissoko, Gerrard or someone who can dish out a bit of the rough stuff and who can help put some meat on our bones.

I digress, even if we had Ings fit, never mind Sturridge I don't think this reasonable question would be asked because we'd have a couple of strikers who would keep big CB on their toes all game with their pace and movement. Origi, recently has looked to put his pace to better effect but because he is far from the finished article it looks as though he needs five good chances to put one away, most of the time.

You realise how good your strikers are when chances are few and far between but the Rush's, Fowlers, Owen's, Suarez's and Torres's could always be called upon to nip that fleeting opportunity into the onion bag.

I just think we're crying out for that striker, and Sturridge briefly gave us a glimpse of what it would be like if we had the quality up front to rely upon. All this sadly is compounded by the fact our AM and M collectively have a horrendous scoring record. Would lumping it up Benteke change this, maybe, maybe not but from the little I have seen from our long ball game suggests the likes of Coutinho and Firmino would have an easier time reading Brail than knowing where the ball is going to drop. Addded to the fact that to most defenders in this league, this is food and drink for them where as it's like lambs to the slaughter as far as our little lightweights are concerned.

I think we do need to be more direct and I think we actually are playing more direct now than we were under Brendan. I tend to look at possession stats when I am looking at other teams results and I have noticed that more and more teams are now winning games with 35% possession.

A few years ago possession was the new in word, Barcelona was the best team in the world and totally dominated possession and everyone was trying to emulate them. Brendan was lauded because his sides played possession football, while Kenny was "old fashioned" because he didn't. Yet it was only when Brendan changed to a faster more direct style, taking advantage of the pace of Sturridge and Sterling combined with the sheer brilliance of Suarez that our results improved and we went oh so f**king close.

Possession is great ... as long as you are doing something positive with it and not just passing the ball sideways, allowing the opposition time to regroup and organise their two banks of four.

Quick transition is one way to give your forwards time and space.

Direct doesn't mean hoofing the ball up field and hoping for the best, it means playing the ball forward rather than sideways, looking for the through ball rather than the safe ball. Pass and move rather than just stand and receive.

If you have 3 world class strikers like Barca you can afford to play possession football, if your strikers are mere mortals maybe more direct football is the way to go. 

Maybe if we called it positive football rather than direct it might be easier for people to accept.


 

we have a pattern of play that has long been established as a club and it never included direct football as a concept. We have been passing and moving for over 50 years what we don't have now is a Roger Hunt an Ian Rush or a Luis Suarez.

So we keep 'pass and move' even if it isn't working and not producing results?

Also Kenny's sides were direct at times. Rafa's were direct at times and as I sadi in the OP Brendan was direct for a spell as well.

It seems maybe only Beerbelly noticed I wasn't exclusively taking about long ball, lump it to a big man direct football.

His thoughts about Torres/Gerrard is more along what I'm thinking.

So we keep 'pass and move' even if it isn't working and not producing results?

Also Kenny's sides were direct at times. Rafa's were direct at times and as I sadi in the OP Brendan was direct for a spell as well.

It seems maybe only Beerbelly noticed I wasn't exclusively taking about long ball, lump it to a big man direct football.

His thoughts about Torres/Gerrard is more along what I'm thinking.

I was suggesting our lack of decent strikers means that all the possession in the world doesn't guarantee you goals. Our problem is who can we be direct with I think its more a case of personnel than tactics and if we do need to go direct you really need two up front to make it work so maybe putting Couthino much closer to Benteke could help.

I was suggesting our lack of decent strikers means that all the possession in the world doesn't guarantee you goals. Our problem is who can we be direct with I think its more a case of personnel than tactics and if we do need to go direct you really need two up front to make it work so maybe putting Couthino much closer to Benteke could help.

Ah, is that what you were saying Walt?

When you said we 'never included direct football as a concept' I took from that you were against it and thought we've never been direct at times over our history.

So we keep 'pass and move' even if it isn't working and not producing results?

Also Kenny's sides were direct at times. Rafa's were direct at times and as I sadi in the OP Brendan was direct for a spell as well.

It seems maybe only Beerbelly noticed I wasn't exclusively taking about long ball, lump it to a big man direct football.

His thoughts about Torres/Gerrard is more along what I'm thinking.

If we had Ings and Sturridge to call upon, then we would definitely have to look at using their pace to exploit teams on the counter and in quick transition. We could try it with Origi too, so long as we don't become one dimensional using it. Nothing wrong in mixing it up.

If we had Ings and Sturridge to call upon, then we would definitely have to look at using their pace to exploit teams on the counter and in quick transition. We could try it with Origi too, so long as we don't become one dimensional using it. Nothing wrong in mixing it up.

Ings and Sturridge would be a big help Beer.

Ings and Sturridge would be a big help Beer.

And just by having them in the team, especially Sturridge we know that the longer, early ball is deffo an option when Danny spins off his marker.

Ah, is that what you were saying Walt?

When you said we 'never included direct football as a concept' I took from that you were against it and thought we've never been direct at times over our history.

I remember a goal from Terry Mac which included about 3 long diagonal passes and a cross to the far post for him to head it in wouldn't mind a bit of that sort of direct football. Last season and now this season our lack of goals makes us beatable.

I think this season in particular, teams such as Leicester and Watford are playing what I would describe as a "throwback" to the English way of playing. Fast, direct, powerful rather than what teams have become accustomed to fairly recently, ie, intricate, overly complicated, too many passes. With the players we have, maybe it would be the right way to achieve results.

This is a tricky question, as some people automatically relate being direct to thumping long balls up the pitch. I would say yes, we should become more direct but in this sense: quit worrying about the undying possession. Play forward, incorporating the strike(s) more often and running off and behind him/them more often. Get down the flanks with purpose, and whip the ball with actual runners coming into the box. I can find myself frustrated with us this year (a lot last year) in the side-to side passing, always ending up back to our CB's for them to swing it out to the fullbacks yet again, or that CM who drops in to essentially be a 3rd CB. As long as we can keep the pressing mentality, lets not be afraid to lose the ball in offensive half. Let's press like we have before, and we get that turnover, pounce on the opponent with our crafty players and movement along our front 3 or 4 players. This is what made us successful in 13-14, we would attack full throttle every chance we got, spreading the other team out with our movement. I wouldn't care watching us have 40% possession every game, as long as we kept that pressing energy and intensity up. That's the directness that I want to see.

Personally, I'm a believer that a possession based, high pressing, pass and move style is the best way to win consistently.  However, there is no formula to win all the time.  Even Barcelona would struggle against a physical Stoke side on a cold windy night at the Brittania -- Stoke are great about playing to their strengths, and on a small, bobbly pitch with English referees the small and skillful players of Barcelona would be in for a real battle.  On the flip side, Barca would rip them apart on the big, prsitine, open spaces available at Camp Nou.  Also, Spanish (or European) referees wouldn't allow Stoke's "thugs" to play as rough as they can in the Prem.

At the end of the day, it's all about developing a set of tactics and getting the right personnel to optimize those tactics.  I think Jürgen will play a more direct style than Brendan employed, and I'm OK with that.  I just want to see exciting, entertaining, and winning footie.  Is that asking too much???

It's football, it's simple, mix it up. Pass and move, get in the tackle, work hard! sometimes cross low, sometimes high depending on the situation. I don't think it needs over analysing.

I'm with you, pal.  We need to get away from 'philosophies' and remember the point of the game is to score more goals than the other bunch of lads.  We need to get better at seeing the opportunities and capitalizing on them quickly, whether that means direct long passes or short quick ones.

As several people have said, 'direct' doesn't need to mean 'Wimbledon88/Pulis/Allardyce', but it can and should mean that players are looking to get the ball forward quickly and create as much danger as possible. 

We don't need to be lumping it up to a big striker every time for that to happen.  Watch highlights of the goals from the 'nearly season' (13/14) and you can see just how quickly and often we broke forward and created chances on the counter-attack (not much possession football there).  Yes, we had the players to do it, and we're not far off now (no-one as good as SG and LS, admittedly).  We have skill, we have pace (Origi, Ibe), the only thing we don't seem to have is the vision and passing accuracy of a Gerrard; Henderson comes closest.  However, we also have players who can interplay quick short passes to work in tight spaces if needed.  Its just a case of getting the players to see the options quickly enough and weigh up what's needed in the blink of an eye!  If they can't do it, then we need to get somebody in who can.

 Good OP.

It's football, it's simple, mix it up. Pass and move, get in the tackle, work hard! sometimes cross low, sometimes high depending on the situation. I don't think it needs over analysing.

Simple really.

Well we can analyze it till the cows come home , there's one simple fact being we have been left a legacy of a midfield that basically dont know how to score , consistently , the very fact they just are not good enough ,

Even if we had a flying Torres /Owen  type of player it would be of little use because the one who made them got shipped out by the last clown

, Look at any top team and I do mean any including your Brazil,s the Germans , them cu*ts down the east lancs the great arsenal teams in fact our very own great teams they all had one thing in common , a fully functional hard tackling play making midfield sadly we dont .

Its a good OP.

Successful styles of play are cyclical - becoming more direct is currently in vogue and imnsure Klopp will take us in that direction however it wont benlongbbefore possession-based play dominates again.

The important thing is getting the right players in to enact whatever style we are using to the best of our ability.

It woud make sense to keep our pass and move philosophy and do that better than anyone else.

Hopefully Klopp will have the chance to demonstrate his tactical prowess withinbthose parameters - premiership teams adapt very quickly.