Liverpool 2-0 Stoke: Dalglish switches to a three-man defence
The starting line-ups
Raul Meireles and Luis Suarez scored the goals as Liverpool eased to victory.
Kenny Dalglish named an interesting team, with Luis Suarez on the bench and Dirk Kuyt upfront alone.
Tony Pulis played a 4-5-1 shape – John Carew made his full debut.
First, it’s difficult to know how much to read into this Liverpool system. The use of a three-man defence is extremely unusual in the Premier League – this was the first time a true three-man defence has been used in 2010/11 by any side (drawing a distinction between three- and five-man defences), and in that respect, it was a very interesting decision.
Height?
On the other hand, there’s also a feeling (as Liverpool journalist Paul Tomkins put forward last night) that the formation was used primarily because Dalglish wanted to get more height in the side. This wouldn’t be the first time this season a manager has done something specific to deal with Stoke’s threat from set-pieces – when Manchester United played them earlier this season, Sir Alex Ferguson played Patrice Evra on the left of midfield, in order to get more height in the side with the use of John O’Shea at left-back. It wasn’t indicative of a long-term strategy – Evra hasn’t played at left midfield since, and Dalglish might not play three at the back after this.
As it turned out, the height wasn’t as important as one might have expected. Rory Delap was only a substitute, so Stoke possessed little threat from throws, whilst Pulis’ side didn’t win a single corner.
Formation match-up
The game was interesting, however. Pulis chose to use a 4-5-1 rather than a 4-4-2 formation, which, as discussed before, often gives the side with a three-man defence a bit of a problem – they’re overstocked at the back (3 v 1) which is fine defensively, but leaves a shortfall somewhere else on the pitch. Liverpool had the benefit of Daniel Agger being comfortable on the ball and able to move into midfield successfully, whilst Martin Skrtel did similarly with less impact.
Liverpool were effectively using four central midfielders in addition to two wing-backs, and they dominated possession (although any side playing any formation generally dominates possession against Stoke). Steven Gerrard and Raul Meireles played reasonably high up the pitch, which pushed Salif Diao and Marc Wilson back, and opened up the rest of the central midfield zone for Fabio Aurelio and Lucas Leiva to patrol, with only Dean Whitehead sporadically closing them down. As a result, they kept possession easily there, with both Aurelio and Lucas ending with an 89% pass completion rate.
Lack of chances
The forward pass was sometimes more difficult, however, and both Gerrard and Meireles came deep to pick up the ball, leaving Dirk Kuyt isolated and lacking support. For his part, Kuyt had an excellent game and held the ball up very well throughout, but that hold-up play has to be combined with midfield runners, and in the first half Liverpool were too slow to get up the pitch towards him, and took until the 36th minute to test Asmir Begovic.
Defensively, Liverpool were simply better prepared for the game in terms of tracking runners and knowing their individual roles. Communication was good between the wing-backs and the back three, with Glen Johnson and Martin Kelly passing on the responsibility of the Stoke wingers at the correct points. When it was the reverse situation, Stoke looked baffled when it came to dealing with wing-backs – their wide midfielders tracked Johnson and Kelly very deep and Stoke often ended up with two right-backs or two left-backs. Kelly had a better game than Johnson – but then he was on his natural side and could overlap more comfortably, whilst Johnson kept coming inside into the centre of the pitch where Liverpool had enough players already. When playing this system, the wing-backs do need to stay wide to stretch the opposition.
Stoke were pretty poor, and had a similar problem with a lack of support for Carew. He competed well with the Liverpool back three, winning six from 10 headers, but couldn’t do it all on his own. Stoke’s real area to exploit was in their own full-back position – with Liverpool playing no natural wingers, they had time on the ball and space in front of them – but too often they simply hit the ball long, summed up by Danny Higginbotham’s chalkboard.
Second half
Liverpool produced relatively little early in the second half, though Meireles gave them the lead when he smashed the ball into the net following a blocked Steven Gerrard free-kick.
Suarez’s introduction for Aurelio pushed Gerrard deeper and made Liverpool 3-4-1-2, with Suarez upfront with Kuyt, and Pulis responded by going 4-3-3, with Ricardo Fuller on the left and Jermaine Pennant on the right either side of Carew. This was the correct move to try and counter a three-/five- man defence as it results in one of (a) the centre-backs being drawn wide, (b) the wing-backs being pushed back or (c) neither, and the players being left unmarked.
However, it wasn’t a particularly brave 4-3-3, with Pennant still expected to track back and help out defensively. Telling Pennant and Fuller to stay high up against the Liverpool defensive line on the touchlines for the final 20 minutes would have been a much more interesting approach.
Suarez got a goal on his debut from a ball over the top (and thanks to a terrible offside line) to seal the victory.
Conclusion
The new formation worked well for Liverpool – although they rarely looked certain to break the deadlock at 0-0, they were clearly the better side. The specifics of the formation are less important than the news that Dalglish is willing to change his tactics and strategy to suit individual opponents.
Stoke were disappointing – Pulis left it late to change things, and they didn’t test Pepe Reina until the 80th minute.
Liverpool 2-0 Stoke: Dalglish switches to a three-man defence
I think that Liverpool need one creative midfield player as additon to the current squad. And also, they need better centre backs in my opinion. Kenny is Liverpool, he is good manager and if they manage to get few signings, they could get back in the title race next season.
Very interesting from Dalglish/Steve Clarke (whom I imagine is the man who’s really responsible for tactical stuff). I figure they must have had Delap and a 4-4-2 (as I believe Stoke usually play) in mind. It worked shockingly well anyway, and while I don’t necessarily think we should be playing a ton of three man back lines, I think a 4-3-2-1 (with Suarez and one of Gerrard/Meireles behind Carroll) might suit our players very well, provided everyone’s healthy, of course.
If we are going to play this formation again (and with all the 4-4-2 side in the Prem, it might be worth doing), then I’d like to see Kelly played on the right of the back three and Johnson and Aurelio used as the wingbacks. Kelly was born to play on the right of a back three, and then you’d have two center backs comfortable stepping up into midfield, instead of one (Agger), and another who’s happy to run forward but doesn’t actually have any idea what to do with the ball when he does (Skrtel). Plus, you’d have Johnson and Aurelio–both more naturally attacking players than Kelly–playing on their natural sides,
Thanks for covering this, ZM. Good work.
The reason this formation works, I think, is a lack of pace on the part of Stoke. Against a countering 4-3-3, such as Manchester City or Chelsea, this formation would have significant trouble nullifying all the present threats as it retreats toward goal. In particular, Kyrgiakos is pretty immobile, but he works in this game because one, he was comfortable getting into the box, and two, he can keep up with Carew. One note- Gerrard got a lot of time on the ball, allowing him to advance it into the final third. Strange, considering every one else was getting closed down as fast as possible. Liverpool really started to put pressure on Stoke when they started playing two touch football and putting short passes into presumptive space, trusting one of their own to run onto it.
Oh, yeah I very much agree. This shouldn’t be our typical setup by any means (it certainly couldn’t handle a Man City or Chelsea 4-3-3). And while Kyrgiakos is useful against the Stokes of the world, he basically useless against anyone decent except on set pieces.
That said, I’d love to see if a formation like this with 2 ball-playing CBs, and better wingbacks could be flexible enough to be a every game type of formation in Prem. LFC just isn’t the team for it yet.
Oh, and Kuyt was awesome. This year, he’s been a one man counter attack killer (in the bad way) when played on the wing, but he was GREAT playing alone up front.
ZM, why change to 2 strikers when you have the lead? Somewhat counter intuitive. Put more pressure on the opposition, better chance of catching them on the break as they inevitably push somewhat forward?
My initial thought is that Kenny simply wanted to give Suarez some playing time without having him go a full 90 right out of the gate. Plus, if Liverpool weren’t creating that many opportunities offensively, perhaps the best defense here was a stronger attack?
Yeah, I don’t think it was tactically motivated. He just wanted to get Suarez his debut in a low pressure environment ahead of the Chelsea match on Sunday.
There was no change, really. Meireles dropped back into midfield when Aurelio went out, then was replaced by Shelvey 10 mins later. One fun thing about Liverpool under Dalglish is that the forward players have permission to make runs and interchange a lot, so it’s really no big deal if it’s a “striker” up there. ZM can say Gerrard was dropped deeper, but his role was the exact same all game and I don’t think it’s correct to say Liverpool ever played 3-4-1-2. At all times Liverpool had 3 central midfielders. To be fair, Dalglish allows them freedom to make forward runs, but the formation was always one beginning with 3-5.
It’s great to see a gaffer willing to change things a bit to suit the players he has. KK and Steve Clarke have been exceeding my expectations immensely. Hope is alive an well at Anfield!
It may be something Liverpool have in mind to try again this season as they do have three good centrebacks (with Carragher) and they were after Charlie Adam (who I presume would’ve played in place of Fabio Aurelio) and they now have a big lank to lump balls up to and hold it up while they all charge after it.
I’m not sure I’d consider Skrtel a good center back; his form has been awful this year. At least he provided a moment of hilarity yesterday, though, with his “shot”.
I wonder who in that case is going to cross for Carroll, when he is fit. Only Kelly did a decent job and against stronger sides he would be likely pinned back.
Aurelio puts in good deliveries from crosses and free kicks. As someone above said, if they continue with this, an Agger, Carra, Kelly back 3 with Aurelio and Johnson as wing backs would be near perfect. All the players would be in their most natural positions.
wasnt fluid but very intersting..
and great insight again ZM
so wherein lies the difference between a 3-4-2-1 and a 5-2-2-1? i understand they are nominally similar, but im curious as to what the wing backs do that counts them more as part of the midfield than the back line…
im also very curious to see if dalglish sticks with this formation against the lower table teams. the back seems more than able to handle strikers deployed in a 4-4-2 and the packed midfield seems like it would contain runs from non elite midfields. offensively, meireles and gerrard can cause a lot of confusion and create a lot.
looking forward to see how they match up against chelsea and what ancelotti does with torres…
“so wherein lies the difference between a 3-4-2-1 and a 5-2-2-1?”
In a 3-4-2-1 wingbacks play higher up the pitch and are encouraged to attack more. As the article pointed out, Stoke was too worried with Glen Johnson and Martin Kelly to have their fullbacks push up the pitch all that much. When a team lacks fullback width and skillful wingers a side does not have to worry about dropping its wingbacks to defend as much because their three centre backs will not get stretched.
Stoke’s plan was essentially to hoof the ball up to Carew and have him knock it down for oncoming midfielders. When the midfield is overloaded with opposition players, it is hard for that to be an effective strategy.
Moreover, Liverpool’s slow patient build-up allowed them to overload Stoke’s box pushing Stoke back even further making it hard to hit back with quick counters because of their lack of sophisticated players.
That being said, with Liverpool’s current personnel, and the inherit problems with playing three at the back, I doubt this system will be used all that often even though some commentators seem to think this will be Liverpool’s new system.
Yeah, I think it can be very effective against the lower table, very English 4-4-2/4-5-1 teams who basically use CBs at fullback, but it would have to be significantly modified to be effective against top teams.
given that carroll and suarez will play given their hefty price tag, and gerrard and merales work best in a similar role, I think the 3 man defense would be a good attempt to accomodate them all. I would settle for a formation like:
————-Carroll——-
———Suarez————
————-Gerrard——-
———Meireles–Lucas—-
Johnson—————-Kelly
—Skrtel-Agger-Kyrgiakos—
———–Reina————
With Johnson and Kelly providing width and Gerrard the attacking, Meireles the box-to-box and Lucas the holding. I think it would be impossible to accomodate their “fantastic four” in any other formation without playing someone out of place.
I also think an interesting idea would be to substitute Lucas for Kuyt in the holding role. I feel Kuyt would have enough energy and defensive to excel in such a position, and is disclipined enough to hold his position.
“I think it would be impossible to accomodate their “fantastic four” in any other formation without playing someone out of place.”
Why? An orthodox 4-3-3/4-3-2-1 hybrid (like Chelsea’s) could easily accommodate them–Gerrard and Meireles playing box-to-box in midfield, Suarez out wide/in the hole and Carroll as the main striker.
I think the 4-3-3 or the 4-2-3-1 (depending on opposition) would suit Liverpool’s squad the best, as in the 3-3, Lucas, Meireles and Stevie G could play reasonably close to each other, Lucas in the holding role and the other two taking turns in driving forward, or in the 2-3-1, the Portugal playing the passing role and Gerrard pouncing on Carroll flick-ons. Of course, the forward three in any case could be Suárez on the left to allow him to cut inside, Carroll upfront and centre (it would be silly to play him anywhere else) and Kuyt on the right, especially against Evra, Cole and Baines.
suarez on the left? waste.
He’s basically been a wide forward all his career. If it’s 4-2-3-1, it’d have to be a lopsided, Spain-style 4-2-3-1 though, with Suarez basically on the same band as Carroll, with Gerrard and Kuyt/Maxi on the same band.
Waste in what way? I’m curious, please elaborate!
look at all the goals he scores…most of them are from a central position as opposed to out wide, and he is not a natural winger and so if you played him there it would be a tactical weakness on the team as a whole as he won’t track a full back who will bomb forward and even if he did, it will be a waste of his talent as he isnt suited to such defensive work
Interesting tactics from Liverpool (or Steve Clarke) as someone has pointed out. At the time, I still thought it was slightly unfair to dismiss Hodgson, but not just because Liverpool have improved since his departure, I think now it was the right decision. Hodgson clearly wasn’t motivating the place, and the atmosphere round the place must have been bad, and things needed freshening up, and it looks like ‘King Kenny’ is doing that.
As for the team now, I think both Carroll and Suarez are decent signings, despite both being overpriced, £35 million for Carroll?! I think Carroll’s a good player, very bright future ahead of him, but paying £35 million is like paying a tenner for a freddo. I think with Carroll you have to kind of centre the team around him, he’s not the most technically gifted player, he’s not quick, but his strengths are when you’re getting balls into the box for him, and letting him attack them aerially, so that’s how you’ve got to play, and he will be effective, as Newcastle proved. Who’s going to be getting the balls in for him at Liverpool? Don’t think Maxi’s delivery is great, push Aurelio on from left back, and on the right I’d push Johnson forward. I think Johnson is an awful right back, he can’t defend, so don’t play him there, but he’s decent going forward, and his crossing isn’t too bad. So I think Aurelio/Johnson need to be told to go out with the sole aim of getting balls into the box for Carroll.
The problem for Liverpool is still the defence though, but I think if they can sort it out in the summer, they’ll be in a good position to challenge for the title next season. However, as I said, the defence is the problem, Skrtel is a poor player, Kyrgiakos isn’t much better, how Skrtel managed to regularly keep Agger out of the team during parts of the Benitez/Hodgson era’s is beyond me. Both are just lumps, both are clumbsy, and if Liverpool want to challenge next season, a top quality defender alongside Agger, who I rate quite highly, is a must in my opinion. And also, a top quality left back is an absolute must, Conterao from Benfica maybe?
Until the end of the season, against some of the lesser teams, go 4-4-2 and direct, get the ball up to Carroll, flicks on’s for Suarez who can look to get in behind with his pace and movement, and holding the ball up and linking up with Gerrard, which gives a team of.
Reina
Kelly-Carragher-Agger-Aurelio
Johnson-Lucas-Gerrard-Maxi
Carroll-Suarez
You’re really going to put Meireles–probably our second best player this season–on the bench? I think a 4-4-2 would be fine, with Stevie on the right, but I don’t think Dalglish will do that, so I don’t want 4-4-2. And the other problem with your formation is that you’re starting all 3 of our decent fullbacks (one of whom is famously injury prone), which is pretty untenable, since both Kelly and Aurelio need frequent rest.
I agree about the defense. Skrtel desperately needs to be replaced; it should be one of the summer’s top priorities. He was very good two years ago, acceptable last year, but this year he’s been awful. I agree, it’s hard to see how you could prefer him to Agger–it’s not like Agger’s bad at defending or heading the ball. It’s like Hodgson thought his passing ability was a bad thing, rather than something he just didn’t much care about.
Kenny and Steve did some interesting things here to solve their problems vs Stoke.
1. There are no true wingers in the Liverpool squad. Maxi and Kuyt are slow and relatively old. The answer? Depending on your point of view, they chose a formation that has no wingers or they converted their young, fast fullbacks into wingers. Genius move, especially since they correctly judged that Stoke would not have the pace to punish them on the wings.
2. Not playing everyone, every game. Liverpool now have something they are not used to: a surplus of attacking players. We can’t necessarily play all of Carroll, Suarez, Kuyt, Gerrard, and Meireles together. But that’s not a bad thing. Depth in the squad is something to be desired. If you saw the team dead on their feet the last 10-20 mins of the Fulham game, you will probably agree.
3. Keeping weak fullbacks protected. By using 3 center backs, they made sure Kelly and Johnson each have someone close by to help out on defense. Previously Kuyt and Maxi were used for this on the wings, but the help can just as easily come from behind.
4. Keeping weak defensive midfielders protected. Another game with 2 defensive midfielders and 3 central midfielders overall, another clean sheet and victory. No Liverpool midfielder is capable of patrolling in front of the back four alone adequately, and the formation did not sacrifice this. For those calling for 4-4-2 with Liverpool, it’s very, very dangerous; as seen under Hodgson.
At the moment, Liverpool have gathered an interesting assortment of quality strikers (Carroll, Suarez, Kuyt), quality attacking midfielders (Meireles, Gerrard, Maxi), and decent utility midfielders (Lucas, Shelvey), but are desperately short of true wingers (none) and defensive midfielders (Poulsen). Not sure about the 3 center backs, but I certainly expect to continue to see our midfield flooded for the near future.
“The specifics of the formation are less important than the news that Dalglish is willing to change his tactics and strategy to suit individual opponents.”
An extremely astute comment, and as noted, please give Clarke some credit for this as well!
“No Liverpool midfielder is capable of patrolling in front of the back four alone adequately, and the formation did not sacrifice this.”
I disagree with this. Lucas is slowly becoming a mini-Busquets, has been our best player this season, and he’s perfectly capable of being the holding midfielder on a title winner, in my view. Granted, he needs someone playing box-to-box to help out, but that’s true of every DM in the world except for (perhaps) Mascherano, and even he got run over by Germany when trying to hold the midfield alone.
Oh, how I wish I could agree with you. I think it’s an interesting choice of words, because the “holding” part he does just fine, receiving the ball and distributing it when we are in possession.
And not to belabor (I hope), but get into the meat of the point, what do you mean when you say “mini” Busquets? If you mean he’s shorter, yes. Covers less ground, yes. Tackles not as well, yes. Has less impact on the game in terms of disrupting opponent play, yes. So if this is what you mean by “mini”, perhaps you will reflect on it and agree with my assessment below that he is an ok player but not outstanding. The position requires more physically than Lucas has to offer.
What I want there is a player who can cover more ground, tackle better, and disrupt attacks better. It doesn’t mean we have to have another player who is capable of being captain of Argentina. Momo Sissoko did this adequately for us before Mascherano.
Eh, I loved Momo, but I’d rather have Lucas. I do think they’re roughly equivalent players, though, just with different skill sets. If we were going to play a more direct 4-4-2ish style (which we may), then I’d rather have Momo, but as long as we’re playing pass and move, balancing possession and directness, then I’d rather have Lucas. He’s just much better than Momo at everything except chasing attackers down and eating them for lunch (not that I didn’t love that). And I actually think he’s very good at breaking up play, just not in flashy ways, but I think it’s reasonable to disagree on him.
How about this? I agree that you wouldn’t want Lucas as the sole holder in a 4-1-4-1 or something against top teams. He can’t cover the entire area between the lines on his own. But again, I think only Mascherano and a few other terrier-like players can do that anyway, and they are universally worse at playing the holding role when the teams has the ball (not to mention having much worse disciplinary records). So, I don’t think Lucas can be one of the *best* players on a title winning team, but with a few excellent players around them, I do think a Lucas-Meireles-Gerrard midfield could win a title.
And all you would need to add to that midfield to win a title would be new centerbacks, new fullbacks, one top-class winger, and for Suarez and Carroll to justify the 55 million pounds spent on them.
And by the time that happens, Gerrard will be far removed from being effective at the highest level. So you’ll need a new world-class midfielder as well.
Liverpool are at least three years away from even figuring in a title race, let alone winning it.
I do agree with the substance of your post though. It’ll be interesting to see how Clarke/Dalglish deal with the facts that A) our best players our all central players and B) Carroll is only useful if you can put the ball on his head.
At the moment, Liverpool have gathered an interesting assortment of quality strikers (Carroll, Suarez, Kuyt) – Kuyt a quality striker, really? Suarez has banged in goals in the Dutch league, so did Mateja Kezman, you can’t label Suarez a quality striker after about half an hour of PL football.
Keeping weak fullbacks protected. – I don’t think the aim of having three CB’s was because the fullbacks were considered weak, although it is an area Liverpool are weak in.
Also you refer to Maxi as a ‘quality attacking midfielder’ whilst also basically referring to him as poor, relatively slow and old, and also I wouldn’t call Lucas a utility player, I’d without doubt call him a first team regular, and an underated player as well, putting him in the same bracket as Shelvey, an 18 year old who gets Europa League games and 15 minutes in the PL every now and then is a bit unfair on Lucas in my opinion.
Hi Mark,
>Kuyt a quality striker, really?
Absolutely. I don’t think many teams have a 3rd striker of his quality. He has delivered in the past for us when Torres was injured and showed again last night that he’s still strong, can hold the ball up and play it wide to a runner, can get in dangerous positions, can work in tandem with another striker, etc. He doesn’t have pace or a sure touch, but he’s pretty good. If you want to define quality as “can lead the line for any team in the Premier League for a whole season” or “can score 15+ goals for any club” then I think your standard is too high.
>you can’t label Suarez a quality striker after about half an hour of PL football.
Of course I can. He may not work out in the Prem, but certainly I can label him so after his incredible performances in the past, including the World Cup. Not to mention his 22m+ valuation that was met by Liverpool. There is football played outside England, you know.
>Also you refer to Maxi as a ‘quality attacking midfielder’ whilst also basically referring to him as poor, relatively slow and old
Indeed. Many players are slow and poor when played out of position. Take a world-class center back and play him as a striker and you will call him that, too! Maxi is absolutely too slow to play winger. He was barely quick enough to play there at 25, and he’s now 30. Argentina play him in the middle of the park and I agree that there he is capable of some nice touches. Remember his one-twos with Torres earlier this season? That is where Maxi has something to offer. But he can’t run well, not like a young athlete like Johnson or Kelly, which is required to play on the wing. And he can’t tackle well, either.
>I wouldn’t call Lucas a utility player…putting him in the same bracket as Shelvey…is a bit unfair on Lucas in my opinion.
In my opinion, a utility player is one of some use, who can get along with the other players without dropping the level too far, but who does no one thing particularly well. That is Lucas at Liverpool.
He tries hard, has a nice touch on his passes short- to medium-range, and good awareness and vision around him. He has a good attitude, works hard and gets along with his teammates. He contributes to play but rarely makes a big impact. He has no outstanding speed, power, nor tackling ability but manages to just do enough most of the time. He is played out of position as a defensive midfielder, which he is not suited to; as a young player at Gremio he was a forward central midfielder, and his manager then (now the Brasil manager) does not feel he is a defensive midfielder either, fwiw.
Shelvey is not as developed as Lucas, of course, but he is of the same mold. All-purpose, does a lot of things ok but no one thing great. Same deal as Lucas in my opinion.
“He is played out of position as a defensive midfielder, which he is not suited to; as a young player at Gremio he was a forward central midfielder, and his manager then (now the Brasil manager) does not feel he is a defensive midfielder either, fwiw.”
Really? When did he say that? When he first sold Lucas or now? Because he plays him at DM for the national team. And Lucas may have been originally in a box-to-box/AM mold, but he’s certainly a DM now, though I can see with disagree about his abilities.
And I think Shelvey only looks like a utility midfielder right now because he’s 18. He looks to me like he’s got a chance to be very good at the attacking aspects of a CM (especially passing) but not so much at the defensive ones. By the time he’s a first team regular, I’d bet a lot he’ll have a clearly defined role.
Menezes quoted in Lance! last fall before the games vs Ukraine & Iran:
“Players like Lucas are fundamental to the team, they are sometimes not played in the best positions by the clubs they play for, but they are good team players, and a crucial part of our plans to win the World Cup in 2014″.
Tough to verify this kind of quote because Lance! does not have an English version afaik.
And you’re right that from what I’ve seen Lucas has been pretty deep for Brazil, but what did Mano mean then…in any case, I saw Lucas vs Iran and he did that same one-gear loafing about stuff he does for Liverpool. The guy has about as much acceleration as an old wheelbarrow. xO
People keep bringing up Kezman and Alves as justifications for offering a pittance for Suarez, somehow forgetting about the likes of Romario, Ronaldo, Ibrahimovic, van Basten, Bergkamp and those are just the strikers. 25 million euro is a bargain for a man who is probably the most talented foreign player Ajax have had in my life time, and who is yet to peak, especially compared to the transfer fees paid to non-Dutch clubs for decidedly less proven players.
The premier league is filled to the brim with former eredivisie players, almost any player who has an even remotely good season is snatched up, there are bound to be some who don’t work out. And maybe Chelsea just didn’t use Kezman properly. Don’t forget that Dennis Bergkamp was considered such an epic failure at Internazionale that his name was used as a synonym for failure in the Serie A for years.
Im sorry but Stoke are just a terrible terrible side that really do offer nothing. Awful to watch due to how rigid they are, and very uncreative. Now im not even an arsenal fan before i get blasted for this comment, but seriously the only chance they ever have of scoring a goal is from a set piece or a throw in. Like i said a terrible team, and Pulis hasnt even tried to have any creativity in their whatsoever. Got rid of Tuncay and Gudjohnsen- both intelligent classy players because they wont fit into his hoofball gameplan. The sooner theyre relegated the better. Sorry stoke fans but your team are an embarrasment.
thing is, they don’t even have the “lack of money” excuse. Stoke have spent a net total of 67 million euros (about 57 million pounds) in transfer fees over the past 3 seasons:
http://www.transfermarkt.de/de/stoke-city/startseite/verein_512.html
just looking at the 08-09 signings, you have basically 1 good player (Etherington), 2 decent squad players (Abdoulaye Faye and Higginbotham), and a bunch of crap (Kitson, Beattie, Olofinjana, Sonko, Tonge, Soares, Davies, Amdy Faye, combined total of 0 EPL starts this season).
I don’t know what their wages are, but you’re neglecting them… probably very low.
That Danny Higginbotham chalkboard is disgusting.
I’m still shattered Torres left, but Suarez’s goal made me feel better at least.
I really hope the owners are gonna invest, most of the money for Carroll and Suarez are from Babel and Torres. Seriously, give Dalglish a permanent job too.
And talk about a rip-off, Carroll for 35m??
Watching this game and the 3-man D reminded me of the ZM article on the return of the sweeper ( http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/04/22/is-the-sweeper-set-for-a-return-to-prominence/ ). Agger seems quite comfortable on the ball and as a natural centerback he could fit the description of ‘center-half/sweeper in this article. It is also noteworthy that Liverpool’s fullbacks are their only source of width so it would be a good way to protect the back and get them forward.
I wonder if we might see Dalglish play Agger next to Lucas as DM in a 4-2-3-1, who drops into a 3 man D when Johnson & Kelly bomb up the pitch to support the attack (3-1-5) You can watch the animation to see how the 4-2-3-1 transitions. Now that Carragher is fit this becomes a more realistic option. It also would fit with the free flowing passing style Kenny is trying to promote.
Good point above about not playing everyone every game, depth is worth more than having just 1 strong lineup.
I am very interested to see how this team performs against Chelsea. Not at all for the circus factor of Torres but as the first real test for Kenny’s team against a top opponent since this win modest win streak started. Each win has been nice, but they are not steam rolling anyone so Chelsea will be revealing match..
I think Agger is Liverpool’s 2nd best centre back when fit, so I doubt he’ll be used in midfield when everyone is fit. Of course, if one of Gerrard / Meireles / Lucas gets injured, then you could argue that playing Agger in midfield and (say) Skrtel in defense is preferable to Poulsen in midfield and Agger in defense.
I think if one of them gets injured, then it should be 4-4-2. Agger’s too good a CB (for me, he’s clearly our best) to waste in midfield. He is perfect for a 3 man back line though.
Good morning to everyone,
Do you plan to make a list of your 10 best teams of all the time…?
Would be interesting!
Keep on working as well as you do, your website is great.
Alex from France
“Kelly had a better game than Johnson – but then he was on his natural side”- his natural side is centre back. Credit to Kelly. But we haven’t even seen him start at CB yet!!
Anyone got thoughts on whether he might/should be converted to RB as a long term plan? He’s making a good job of it so far…
interesting stuff. a remarkably under-reported story. if Hodgson had done it and lost, he’d have got slaughtered by the media ( for not imposing themselves on Stoke..and make them worry about Liv etc & the usual tactical naivety by Brits which has led to 0 w cup wins on foreign soil ! ) , but because it worked, it was ok & ignored.
I’m not sure why you need to throw in “if Hodgson had done it”. Hodgson had a chance to pick the players and formations, he lost a lot, what he tried didn’t work, and he got fired. The club has moved on and now has a proper manager who is able to motivate his players, defend them in interviews, plan with proper tactics, hire competent assistants (like Steve Clarke, who no doubt contributed a lot to this formation and its success), live up to the owners’ and fans’ expectations, and get through a match without attempting to rub his entire face off. You should move on as well and join the rest of us.
However, your main point is spot on. Zonal Marking is great.
you totally misunderstand me. it wasn’t meant to be pro-hodgson. it was an attack on the media & poor punditry, which is why ZM started this to give us to some quality punditry. Hansen in particular has slaughtered other managers for doing this, yet when his mate Kenny does it, he’s totally silent on it. double standards. try having some principles & logic rather than loyalty type stuff which just ends up like mutv/pravda etc.
A lot was said about Chelsea switching their formation to accommodate Torres – especially on the website with a fine article about Anelka being a trequartista – but nothing has been said of perhaps Liverpool doing the same thing. Surely if Chelsea play a 4-3-1-2 then this is the perfect formation against them. 3 vs 2 at the back. 4 vs 4 in midfield. With the wingbacks tracking the runs of Chelsea’s fullbacks from deep.
This seems to me to be a formation designed to deal with Chelsea that Dalgleish and Clarke are trying out on Stoke first. It also plays to Liverpool’s strengths in that they don’t really have any particularly threatening wingers.
What does Zonal marking think about the possibility of Chelsea’s 4-3-1-2 lining up against a Liverpool 3-4-2-1