@ COACH: Lets talk Tactics!

[txj]

I don't know that I'll go that far. Arsenal was a willing camel; u know the kind that bends down unsolicited!
A truly rotten season, made all the worse by the fact it could easily have been avoided!

But he appears to have found something to build on....

[Coach]

Wenger is yesterday and has been for some years now. Any deviance from a now archaic default, throws the pituitary gland into apoplexy. That said, t'is an interesting approach from Liverpool, one which certainly could serve as the premise for a Rocky Balbaoesque attempt at the remainder of the campaign. 3-4-3/3-4-2-1 makes sense, though perhaps lacks key personnel for pure indulgence. Henderson is a willing runner, but that gift is equally his limitation, a runner and not much else. Would a genuine wide man be a better deploymemt with Henderson perhaps part of a double-pivot before the backline? Could Markovic play wide right, or is his deployment on the opposite flank all the more effective? Moreno's worth a thought.

With Sturridge fit, Sterling and Coutinho/Lallana, width and a bit more solidity in defensive mid, there's the possibility of a second wave akin to that of last season.

Yesterday, four overran three, will the stakes be upped once more, with five midfielders used to run four roughshod?

[txj]

Wenger is yesterday and has been for some years now. Any deviance from a now archaic default, throws the pituitary gland into apoplexy. That said, t'is an interesting approach from Liverpool, one which certainly could serve as the premise for a Rocky Balbaoesque attempt at the remainder of the campaign. 3-4-3/3-4-2-1 makes sense, though perhaps lacks key personnel for pure indulgence. Henderson is a willing runner, but that gift is equally his limitation, a runner and not much else. Would a genuine wide man be a better deploymemt with Henderson perhaps part of a double-pivot before the backline? Could Markovic play wide right, or is his deployment on the opposite flank all the more effective? Moreno's worth a thought.

With Sturridge fit, Sterling and Coutinho/Lallana, width and a bit more solidity in defensive mid, there's the possibility of a second wave akin to that of last season.

Yesterday, four overran three, will the stakes be upped once more, with five midfielders used to run four roughshod?

I too struggle with Henderson. I think in the end he will become a permanent fixture in the middle of a double pivot. It was criminal of BR to let Nuri Sahin go...

But is an interesting concept in the middle of a football season thus far, lacking in imagination...

Save for Monchenglabach and Lucien Favre...

[Coach]

Given pressing is an absolute prerequisite for the success of such a system, where does that leave Mario Balazytelli?

[txj]

Nearest available pine! Especially if rumors of Origi prove correct...

[Coach]

The Europa league could prove Mario's Harry Kane moment. Double pivot for Henderson certainly. Despite the success of the diamond last season, from the signings made, theres a feeling that Rodgers was never truly settled on such a shape, the 3-4-3 may well have been his target all along.

[Ugbowo]

Don't mean to but in....

I really struggle to see the impact/importance of Henderson and Allen. I thought it was glaring to see that playing one much less the both of them was killing Liverpool in tough pressing situations. Neither one offers something creatively and I think that's what has been the main difference between this year and last.

Last year you had two monsters who created something out of nothing and were ruthless infront of goal. I think that hid the deficiencies in some players. This season, with the two headed monster gone, a lot of payers have been exposed.

I am with Coach to an extent that I see no reason why Brendan, with his current 3-2-4-1 shape, cant play Lalana, Coutinho, Sterling, Markovic(or Moreno) and heck Balotelli (until Sturridge is fit) all supported by the same double pivot from Sunday in Gerrard and Lucas.

A back 3 sans Lovren and a restoration of faith in the maligned Mignolet.

How does Emre Can fit in? He is another one Brendan has no clue how to fit in right now. A player of immense talent.

[Coach]

Absolutely Ugbo, in the infancy of this thread, one enjoyed healthy debate over the tactical solution to the 4-2-3-1, schematically, the answers lie within the 3-2-4-1 and certainly, with thought and application, this could prove a devastating strategy for all endorsers.

Liverpool, in their current state of ragtagidness, have the need for the defensive numeracy it offers without compromising attacking shape. The issue then becomes one of personnel and best placement. For all Markovic's distribution against Arsenal, Moreno would shore up the left, the irony being his defensive naivety. Perhaps Lazar could flank the right allowing Sterling to move centrally. Henderson, though thoroughly useless, is to running what Obiesta is to blocking, an appropriate body in certain scenarios. Emre Can could on occasions support Sterling, as could Lallana or Coutinho. Fielding all four would be bold, daring and defensively suspect.

Balotelli at the tip, yes and perhaps louder, no, key to the systems efficiency is an aggressive press from the frontline and Mario is far too lethargic in the approach. Perhaps then Sterling plays a central role till Sturridge returns with Lallana or Coutinho settling in-field. Gerrard would be instructed to sit and stay seated, playing more alike Xabi Alonso or dare one say it Pirlo, albeit minus the level of ability.

Its a solid system and made sense a while back, that Liverpool are motioning towards a variant (3-4-2-1/3-1-3-2-1 or rather 3-4-3ish) is of no surprise.

[Coach]

@BeniTx, many question asked of Brendan's brainchild yesterday. A hint of irony and the perfect paradox, yesterday was perhaps the straw to break the back of selfimportance, vertebral column in question, Steven Gerrard's. Leicester ran the midfield ragged, the intended departure announced shortly after was Steven's moment of clarity, an acute realisation that Anfield or rather Brendanism was no country for old men.

[txj]

@BeniTx, many question asked of Brendan's brainchild yesterday. A hint of irony and the perfect paradox, yesterday was perhaps the straw to break the back of selfimportance, vertebral column in question, Steven Gerrard's. Leicester ran the midfield ragged, the intended departure announced shortly after was Steven's moment of clarity, an acute realisation that Anfield or rather Brendanism was no country for old men.

Won't put too much to the Liecester result cus of tiredness, although it certainly did ask serious questions about Hendo on the flanks and Gerrard alongside Lucas...I suspect Sunderland will be a better template for analysis...

[Coach]

The intensity of the press was weakened in the absence of the running man. Gerrard is every bit a Balotelli in this formation, tiredness alone is too feable an excuse. Imperative to a 3-4-3 is the recovery of possession further upfield, thus masking deficiencies elsewhere. Leicester worked the flanks well and tore through the expanse in front of and either side of Gerrard.

It has been suggested he be deployed as an auxiliary centre-half, but that would be to almost imply that centrehalving is not a specialised discipline of its own. Gerrard is no John Terry or Wes Morgan for that matter. Carrick has played the part but with far from aplomb. Perhaps Rodgers should resign himself to the fact that Steven is approaching finished at the topmost speed for his ageing sinews. For as long as its an aggressive 3-4-3, it remains no country for old men.

[Coach]

No cease in the struggle for Van Gaal's 3-5-2(fool).

[txj]

No cease in the struggle for Van Gaal's 3-5-2(fool).

There's nothing to see here, or the EPL in its entirety so far this season.

The EPL is City's to lose. They are the only ones who can beat themselves! There is an unfortunate and deep-seated malaise about City that multiple coaches have not been able to eradicate. Watch their games again, they are just not professional enough and when its going well, tend to repeatedly lose focus...

[txj]

Best 1HF I've seen Barca play since the late Tito Vilanova was coach.

Spread Atleti wide like a willing hooker and then proceeded to repeatedly and mercilessly penetrate!

The sight of Simeone manic on the sidelines, and Atleti players, five across the field and four behind them looking for who to pick up as Barca moved the ball at pace, inside, outside, with simultaneous, multiple off the ball moves, constantly varying and then re-varying the point of attack, was something to behold.

[Coach]

Took an Armarda's Amistad to bring sense to Enrique.

Agreed, the Premiership has been somewhat docile by and large this season, too much fear and reverence afforded the status quo and a dearth in tactical variety to lend advantage. Why is change so unfathomable? United are a perfect example, granted the 3-5-2 is far from the complimentary motif, but is it of such disastrous intent as to render attack - minded fullbacks incapable of exercising the liberties of the wingback? Luke Shaw for instance.

[txj]

Very surprised at how well the duo of Bentelleb and Mason dominated Arsenal in CM.

Though a similar 4-2-3-1 as Arsenal, the position of Dembele was crucial, although in some phases it denied Spurs the pace of Chadli.

Mason showed some weaknesses in his positioning, but was strong overall

[Coach]

Positional ineptitude from those entrusted to safeguard the midfield. More a 4-1-4-1, Cazorla and Ramsey did nothing in the of occupying Bentaleb and Mason and Coquelin sufferedthe most acute case of Malouditis since Florent's contract renewal. Bellerin was brutally exposed wide right and assist aside, operation Wiltordification of Wellbeck was an absolute failure. Danny was near useless, largely a consequence of his nonsensical deployment. Wide left, if not through the middle, undropable Giroud, coincidentally French a side note, would've served greater purpose. Inverted runs on his stronger foot could've caused the base midfield to drop deeper releasing the press on Ramsey and Cazorla. Stereotyically Wengerian approach, more straight lines the seeds of a one night stand between a pencil and a geometry set.

[benteke]

coach and liverpool supporters, why is Liverpool's 3 at the back system working so well,

liverpool now looks even better in defence yet still creates loads of chances and always seems to have more people in midfield.

[Coach]

Balance. The swashbuckling Scousers of yester-season flew forward in terrific counters, pressed, harried, harassed, allowing quick recovery of possession at a shorter distance from goal. In attack, they were very much a back three, Gerrard dropping deep between the centrehalves. However, the defensive vulnerability of such a shape was exploited in the absence of the key component, the aggressive press, amiss without Sturridge and Suarez.

The change in formation, one that been argued within these pages, was essential and perhaps evolutionary. Commonsense certainly. There's a greater balance about the back line, with weaknesses buffered to a better extent. Can has performed adequately and offers good distribution from deep without compromising the defensive solidity too much. Masherano 2.0 perhaps. In the absence of Gerrard the system functions with greater fluency. The inverted runs of Coutinho and Co from inside forward offer the potential for 4 midfielders, outnumbering and seizing hegemony from the midfield trio colloquial to today.

Perhaps a more solid wide right, Santon would've been a bargain buy, not sure about Manquillo and Johnson is finished. Can Markovic play there indefinitely? Is Jordan Ibe a genuine contender? Is Lucas enough or is Can to step into the midfield alongside Henderson? What Rodgers does in the summer will define how far this tactical upperhand reaches. Defender right-centre? Or give Lovren another chance? Ball winning midfielder or would so aggressive a press, the intention, be better served by more of a Henderson than an Obiesta?

[Coach]

2013

@Tx, you'll remember one arguing in favour of a back three for Liverpool. The system seems to be bearing fruition, but t'is early doors and has been largely unchallenged. The issue with the 3-4-1-2 is the risk of being overloaded in the channels and centrally, assuming the number 10 fails to drop back. For this reason, one suggested a 3-4-2-1 would be more ideal, with diagonal runs wide from Suarez/Sturridge and Coutinho free in the centre.

[txj]

2013

@Tx, you'll remember one arguing in favour of a back three for Liverpool. The system seems to be bearing fruition, but t'is early doors and has been largely unchallenged. The issue with the 3-4-1-2 is the risk of being overloaded in the channels and centrally, assuming the number 10 fails to drop back. For this reason, one suggested a 3-4-2-1 would be more ideal, with diagonal runs wide from Suarez/Sturridge and Coutinho free in the centre.

The lack of real quality in CM is what's constraining the team, apart from the absence of Sturridge. Now he's back I expect a return to the diamond at some stage...or some structure to accommodate Balo.

The overload of the channels is sometimes overstated, esp as Rogers doesn't play a sweeper, but at best a semi sweeper. Besides, its partly the reason his wide back selection is based on pace, which allows the back three to slide to the strong side- towards the ball, with the wing back recovering on the weak side to form a back four, if not five...

[Coach]

@Tx, the flanks remain the primary focus of attack when facing a 3-5-2 and has proven effective throughout the ages. Overrated perhaps, yet savagely exploited and if not the assailant in the demise of this once upon a time, hegemonic alignment, then certainly an accomplice. With regard to Liverpool, why revert to a diamond when the 3-4-2-1 serves them well? Balotelli, by default, lacks the intention to press as aggressively as his predecessors and no doubt the press every bit as precious as the diamond itself. Mario could perhaps serve the Harry Kane role, Mr Europa till he becomes fully ingrained in the attitude and ethos, even then a switch in formation is not a must.

Turning attentions towards Mancunia, United remain very much in tactical limbo with neither the 3-5-2, Diamond or 4-4-2, mirroring the solidarity of old. Such was Van Gaal's insistence upon a back three in the infancy of his era and the patient build-up through midfield, one would've assumed a double pivot infront of the three would've been his founding formation. A protector of some sort for the ball player. With width so important to the philosophy and physiology of United apparently, why the 3-5-2 with wingbacks and nor a more adventurous 3-2-3-2, allowing for more attack-minded widemen? With a gluttony of underperformers at the business end of the season now, does he place all his eggs in the baskets of serendipity or switch it up once more?

And then to Pellegrini, how best to accommodate Wilfred Bony, 4-4-1-1, lopsided 4-4-2, or an asymmetrical 4-3-3, as was the case on occasions last term.

[txj]

The notion of the flanks as the weakness of the 3-5-2 does not recognize the evolution of the modern 3-5-2, where the sweeper of old is replaced by 2 center holding midfielders and the flexibility of zonal marking. That's why I say it is overstated.

Sam Allardyce prior to coming to Anfield had suggested a focus on the flanks, but it never really worked for him.

I'm not saying though it cannot be exploited. My point is, its not a structural weakness as many claim it to be.