Liverpool 3-0 Manchester City: Liverpool find space between the lines
The starting line-ups
This game was over by half time as Liverpool scored three goals in the opening period.
Kenny Dalglish gave a start to young John Flanagan at right-back, and played Fabio Aurelio at left-back. The front six was as expected, in a 4-4-1-1.
Roberto Mancini rested a couple of players ahead of next week’s FA Cup semi-final, giving a start to Edin Dzeko upfront, with Carlos Tevez in behind. James Milner started on the left.
The first half was about constant Liverpool pressure. Both sides tried to press in the first few minutes, but Liverpool settled much quicker and passed the ball better, and had wave after wave of attack.
Problems in the hole
Manchester City’s main problem was an inability to deal with either Luis Suarez or Andy Carroll dropping deep between the lines. Most frequently this was Suarez, who drifted around the pitch and proved very difficult to pick up, though Carroll sometimes switched places with him (see the through ball to Suarez when the Uruguayan hit the post) and Dirk Kuyt also came in from the right to move into central positions.
City’s lines of defence and midfield were simply too far apart, and it’s quite simple to pinpoint the problem here – they were without their usual holding player, Nigel de Jong. For most of this season, he has sat in the deepest midfield position and allowed Gareth Barry and Yaya Toure to play higher up the pitch. Neither Barry nor Toure are strangers to the holding role (they’ve done so with England and Barcelona respectively), but here they seemed trapped in their usual mindset of having an extra midfielder to sweep up behind them, and wanted to pressure Jay Spearing and Lucas Leiva, leaving gaps behind them.
Carroll-Suarez
On the other hand, Carroll and Suarez’s partnership looked extremely promising. In theory they are a classic duo – a tall, powerful number nine and tricky, quick player who moves into space – and the theory translated well to the pitch. Carroll may have got the two goals, but Suarez was superb – finding room throughout the game and distributing the ball well with first time passes out wide.
Carroll’s passing chalkboard looks less impressive on first glance, since he recorded just a 50% pass completion rate. However, considering that many of these are flick-ons and knock-downs for his teammates, the low figure is excusable. If you click ’show numbers’ below, and see that he found Suarez six times in positions on the edge of the box, his contribution in looks much better.
City changes
Mancini was forced to bring Tevez off the pitch with a hamstring injury, and sent on Mario Balotelli instead. At first he played in Tevez’s role off Dzeko, but then Mancini changed his system and moved to a 4-5-1 formation with the Italian on the left, and James Milner tucked into the centre of midfield. This allowed a triangle in midfield, presumably an attempt to shut down the space between the lines.
Liverpool’s attacks continued, however, and Suarez was intelligent enough to get into dangerous positions regardless of City’s switch. Kuyt’s goal was at the end of another attack where Suarez played the ‘link’ role, whilst Carroll’s second came from a Raul Meireles cross – he was given time to play the ball because Dedryck Boyata was concerned about Suarez’s run past him, and so was slow to close down. Liverpool were 3-0 up at the break.
Second half
The second period was almost entirely without incident, though it was notable that Liverpool continued to press and close down well all over the pitch, working well as a unit and denying City time on the ball in midfield.
Amongst the star performers here were Kuyt and Meireles, who tucked in narrow and won plenty of tackles in the midfield.
Conclusion
City were completely unable to deal with Liverpool’s forward duo, particularly when they dropped deep. It’s fair to attribute this roughly 50-5o between Liverpool attacking well and City defending very poorly. It’s unlikely Liverpool will come across many other sides who play so poorly in that crucial zone of the pitch.
That said, even after City switched to a 4-5-1, Suarez’s movement was still fantastic and he found space in different areas – in the channels, on the flanks and in deeper positions. On the basis of this game, his best position is in the centre of the pitch, rather than the wide forward role he occupied at Ajax.
Liverpool 3-0 Manchester City: Liverpool find space between the lines
Was it not Meireles who crossed for the third?
It was indeed. Sweet right peg.
Oops – my mistake, thanks chaps!
Indeed it was.
ZM: great report, as always.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure it was.
Good review ZM, cheers.
Great game (well, first half – Man City never looked like getting back in it in the second half). Liverpool were awesome, I thought. They did not stop harassing, closing down, winning the ball back etc etc etc. Carroll looks really good – honestly, I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone who is so good in the air than he is – its like he’s got a homing device on his head which attracts the ball to it – his ability to read the balls trajectory and then time his jump to meet it is quite scary, actually. Suarez is obviously a quality player as well (he’s a nasty piece of work, mind – in Holland he served bans for spitting at players and biting someone – he does have the front teeth of a demonic rabbit, so it shouldn’t be a surprise…..).
The game was another example to show that you can’t rest your best players in the premier league and still expect to get a result – Man City couldn’t keep the ball at all, until Silva came on (and the game was up by then), and ZM’s review showed how much they missed De Jong. I will laugh my ass off if Man City don’t finish top 4, and Mancini gets the sack (although, I’ve got a funny feeling that even if Man City don’t finish top 4 they may let Mancini stay on – which would be ridiculous – Spurs have got a tough run-in so I’d be very surprised if Man City don’t finish at least 4th).
Dalglish is doing a good job. It’s really interesting to see Hodgson doing so well at West Brom – it shows that his style of management, tactics and team building work very well at lesser clubs with average players (like Fulham) but not so much at a big club with better players, where the expectation for results and performances is much higher (like Liverpool). This whole scenario reminded me of what Harry Redknapp has done at Spurs – whilst I watched this game, I formulated a theory regarding what certain styles of management are needed at certain types of clubs – I’ll explain my thoughts now, and hopefully you all can give me some feedback:
Ok, the key thing is getting the best out of the players you’ve got in front of you (which Hodgson clearly didn’t do at Liverpool, but clearly IS doing now at West Brom). I think that involves a different approach allied with focus on different areas depending on the club you are at – The players at a club like West Brom are average, and know that about themselves (they should know that they are not World Class, cos they get beaten every other week and spend most of the season fighting relegation). Therefore, if they are good, honest pros, then it is quite likely that they are putting 100% effort and commitment in, whenever they take to the field (as I’ve said, the reason they struggle to win games is that they are of average ability). If that is the case, then what they need is a manager who concentrates on organising and improving them on a tactical level (for instance – working on the back four a lot to keep them tight, and working on the team shape to make them hard to break down and beat – which Hodgson is very good at doing – as shown by what’s happening at West Brom now).
Compare that to a club like Liverpool, who have naturally better players (better creative players, better defensive players). These are players who think that they are good (i.e. – they have a bigger ego about themselves and their ability). Therefore, these types of players don’t need so much hardcore tactical coaching, but absolutely need it drilled into them to make sure that they are giving 100% effort and commitment all of the time (it’s fair to say that some players who know they are good may fall back on their ability and allow themselves to be a little lazier than they should be). From a tactical point of view, a manager at a big club needs to have a good understanding of what the players’ best roles and positions are, and create a system that works to the players strengths.
The reason I mentioned Harry Redknapp’s work at Spurs, is because it’s a very good example of what I’ve just pointed to. When he took over at Spurs, the Spurs players had been playing in a system which wasn’t getting the best out of them. He came in, saw what their best positions and roles were, and simply put them on the pitch in a way that got the best out of them (obviously, a mangers view on the roles of his players is purely his opinion, and that opinion is proved by what happens on the pitch – for instance – I’m sure Capello thought he was getting it right with his decisions on England at the World Cup, but as the games showed, he was clearly getting it VERY wrong). His other main task was to motivate those Spurs players to go out and give their absolute best at all times, because he knew that if they gave their best, in the right system, then they would score goals and win games (Mourinho’s management style is about making the players feel great so that they give their best at all times – interestingly, when he was at Inter he had to focus on tactics more cos he believed the players weren’t quite as good as other teams in the Champions League. We all saw how his meticulous tactical planning worked for them).
As a very broad summary to the above, I’m basically saying that at a small club with average players, you need to spend more time on coaching and tactics, whereas at a big club with better players you need to motivate the players more and spend more time on the mental side of the game (as long as your opinion on your players roles turns out to be right, then you’ll get results). Roy Hodgson’s style is obviously better suited to the samller club than the bigger club (interestingly, through his time at Inter he was doing the same job: taking a team of average – for that level – players and organising them to get the best out of them – if you wonder about that then read his Wikipedia page about his time at Inter), whereas perhaps Dalglish has a better grasp on the finer aspects of big-club management.
You’ll have to excuse my long diatribe – I obviously have way too much time on my hands.
Very interesting theory, I don’t think management is as simplistic as that but I guess you didn’t make that assumption so the criticism I made isn’t really that valid. At first glance the only real objection I have to your idea is the point about Mourinho focusing more on tactics with Inter because he didn’t believe they are good enough. I think that that Mourinho just prefers to work that way, with everything about his team being controlled, rather than opting to beat the other team by playing their normal game. He is also more successful that way as well from what I have seen.
Hope my feedback is at least slightly useful.
Hi, thanks for your reply. I think you are right about Mourinho – I’m sure he does implement the same level of tactical dominace over every team that he manages – perhaps it was more the media at the time focusing on his tactical style when he managed Inter that makes me give the opinion of him that I gave (also, the fact that the tactics themsleves focused on defending and playing on the break, as opposed to him sending the Inter boys out and saying “just try to score more goals than the other team”).
Regarding your comment about simplicity – of course, I don’t view management as a simplistic equation; the very essence of management is you having your opinion on how best you set up whichever players you pick, with your opinion being proved right or wrong by the nature of the game and its result (again, I go back to Capello at the World Cup, and Mancini last night – Silva should have played, or at least come on for Tevez when Tevez went off).
Like I said, thanks for your reply.
” From a tactical point of view, a manager at a big club needs to have a good understanding of what the players’ best roles and positions are, and create a system that works to the players strengths.”
—
Benitez was great at this (barring an unfortunate season). Prime example. He got the best out of Gerrard.
Other managers and pundits alike still dont recognize that Gerrard is horrible when played deep in midfield or centrally. He is wasteful in possession. Rafa from early on played him on the right of midfield (with Alonso/Sissoko or Hamman in CM) which coincidentally was one of his best seasons ever. He then moved him behind Torres which was a masterstroke.
The gerrard that played for liverpool is never the gerrard that plays for england. This is why!
The other player is Torres. He realized Torres plays best on his own up front. Leading the line. He struggled under Hodgson and now at Chelsea.
I think the praise of Redknapp is highly overstated. He has one good season for spurs.
Surely you’d have to say at least two good seasons with Spurs – the season he took over they were bottom, with 2 points from 8 games, and he immediately got them right out of trouble (ok, you could argue this wasn’t a full season, but you’d be splitting hairs a bit too much if you did IMO), and last season. This season hasn’t been bad, but they were always going to struggle with trying to finish 4th again whilst actually trying to progress in the Champions League (what with all the money that Man City have carried on spending, along with Chelsea spending over £80 million on Ramires, Torres and Luiz). They may still finish 4th if they have a very strong end to the season – I’m not saying Harry’s a genius (like, for instance, a Mourinho, perhaps), but I definitely think he’s very, very solid. “Highly overstated”, I think not.
Where does Steven Gerrard fit into this Liverpool side now? Unless the clock can be turned back six years to a time when Gerrard’s ego was small enough for him to play a disciplined central midfield role, surely his only viable option is on the right wing? And given how much Kuyt does for the team out there, should we even be considering a right-back role for Stevie?
Maybe he’ll become more disciplined when he doesn’t have the legs any more…which should happen rather soon
Hopefully he won’t hold them back in the way Totti was doing at the start of the season.
Hopefully he’ll simply be healthy enough to play. He’s had something like four injuries to the same groin this year and is 31–there’s no guarantee he’ll ever be consistently fit again.
Gerrard could play where Raul or Kuyt plays
i disagree, with this shape gerrard should play where spearing was.
Gerrard playing were Spearing was(deeper in midfield) mean TONS of misplaced passes.
As i stated before. Gerrards proven best seasons have been when he’s further forward or on the right (with freedom to roam). When played deep he tends to ‘ping it’ and try the ‘hollywood’ pass, squandering possession easily.
I dont understand how Rafa is the only person to figure this out.
I wonder (and I don’t mean this to sound as offensive/troll-baiting as it’s going to sound) if Gerrard actually has some inherent problem with his intelligence, which is what causes him to have such a lack of discipline.
I mean he seems to have been physically blessed with all the attributes to play as a DM. All that lets him down in this respect is his ego-driven attempts to play hollywood balls and jump into wreckless challenges. Surely if he had any brains, he could just be educated to overcome these bad habits?
Spot on. Simply brilliant football player, but unfortunately cursed with that all too familiar English disease: movingoalitis.
I am led to believe that the main symptom is the incorrect belief that the opposing teams goalposts are moving away from the field of play, at a steady rate, in a contrary direction to one’s own goalposts; thus, the ball is required to be launched towards said opposition’s goals as quickly as possible. (This passage of play is typically displayed by a 40-50 yard aerial pass which invariably results in the ceding of possession.)
@ZM: How does one cope with the Liverpool front four… esp. Suarez who keeps roaming around everywhere? And how are Arsenal gonna stop them this weekend ?
Well they generally play worse away from home and resort to long balling it up to Carroll, their midfield is too far back to support Suarez and make the most of his good positioning.
ZM, is this another example of a central winger, even though Suarez is widely seen as a second striker?
West Brom managed it OK.
Liverpool’s away record is terrible.
A tactical disaster from Mancini, possibly his worst given the relatively settled nature of the squad in the past weeks. ZM quiet rightly pointed out the truck-sized holes in front of the defence left by the absence of DeJong.
I would add that the inclusion of Johnson and Dzeko meant there was no effective pressing of the Liverpool back four once Tevez left.(Dzeko in particular shows no stomach for a proper pursuit of the ball, and prefers the Robinho-esque routine of a 3/4 pace run along the back line, seemingly timed to arrive at the defender just after the ball has been comfortably moved on.)
The lack of Silva also hurt City, as they had nobody who could effectively retain possession in midfield and give the back four a rest before the next Liverpool attack.
For me the biggest question is: did Mancini really need to rest DeJong and Silva for a match that is 6 days away?
What I don’t understand is if Mancini was going to rest his players why didn’t he rest Tevez as well? If he was going to put Tevez on he might as well have just played DeJong and Silva right?
Carroll, Suarez, Kuyt, Spearing, Flanagan were all superb, mostly in terms of the energy and passion they showed. Although you haven’t really mentioned Flanagan because he didn’t really have to do that much, his passing completion rate was something like 79%, and I don’t think he put a foot wrong defensively (though he was helped out, both in terms of tracking back and closing down, and in terms of always busting a gut to make a passing angle, by Kuyt and also Lucas). Still, surprising that Mancini didn’t switch Johnson out to the left where, you feel, he would’ve had more joy. Great to see Aurelio play 90 minutes too.
I would also suggest that people take a look at Lucas’ passing chalkboard, which shows how consistently he looked to pass forward, to the feet of Suarez. The Uruguayan had space, for the reasons ZM noted, but Lucas’ accurate, direct passing was a delight.
Another interesting point to note is that Liverpool’s back four very rarely had to defend particularly desperately. It was a masterclass in ‘defending from the front’ – most notable in the fact that Kuyt, Suarez and Carroll each attempted over a dozen tackles, while Carragher (1), Skrtel (2), Flanagan (2) and Aurelio (5) had comparatively little to do.
Re: Gerrard, he would probably take Spearing’s role in the centre of the pitch, or could conceivably play the nominally left-sided midfielder role which Meireles played well today, which would allow him to cut inside and link up with Carroll and Suarez.
(My brief homage to Liverpool’s performance: http://crowdgobananes.blogspot.com/ )
I’m probably going to get shot down for having this opinion, but Carroll’s first touch – not including his head – really is *terrible*. Also, his mobility is very, very limited; see, for example, the number of times he flicked/passed the ball on last night and then simply loitered in midfield as the play advanced. Aside from his goals (which, in fairness, you really can’t argue with) what separates him from his opposite number last night; the widely derided Edin Dzeko? (Though I suppose putting him alongside the excellent Suarez – not tactically-speaking – really does him little favour in comparison.)
Well, I can see the point you are trying to make. I would say that last night Carroll looked to work harder when Liverpool lost the ball than Dzeko did when Man City lost it. Also, I think it depends on when in the game you are making note of Carrolls off-the-ball running, cos from about 60 minutes onward, to me, he genuinely looked knackered (his fitness level at the moment is as of a player at the beginning of the season – most other players in the league are either right on peak fitness, or have gone just beyond it – when Carroll plays in this summer’s Under-21 Championship he should be at peak fitness – and I predict he is going to, literally, terrorize other countries defences).
Also, Carrolls supreme ability in the air is a MASSIVE part of why he’s considered one of the best strikers in England now – if you take that away from him then he probably is only average, but with it he is well above average……
Literally terrorize, eh? I look forward to seeing that. My predictions are that most teams will struggle to handle him in the air and will be too busy laughing at his “ball control” to defend against him on the ground (if he hasn’t already shoved them over).
But yes, your points are sound. He is incredible in the air and most of his ‘loitering’ was post the sixty-minute mark. His fitness levels, too, may have be a part of his bad first-touch and dribbling – like against Ghana, when he was past the last man and clumped it out of play – though I don’t think (by continental standards, at least) that’s much of an excuse.
‘Literally terrorise’
Jamie, is that you?
yeah, I agree that his finishing and shooting (apart from last nights bulleted-wonder) isn’t quite as good as it needs to be for a top-top striker – but, he is young and should improve a lot…..I definitely think Liverpool did the right thing in spending the money on him they did…..
…….and, RA, no, my name isn’t Jamie (but for the right price, tonight I can be whoever you want me to be…..)
Ah, I knew you were to clever to be Redknapp.
What I love about Andy Carroll isn’t his ground play, although he is a good finisher and can pull crackerjacks like the one yesterday out of his bag. What I love about him is that he is an amazing team player. He doesn’t just use his aerial ability to attack goal – he sets up other team mates around him and is always a problem for opposition teams. He’s a mix of Heskey and Drogba – and I hope he will go on to be an amazing player for Liverpool.
I would agree that it was spotty but watch some of his Newcastle games and it’s infinitely better. Also his through ball to Suarez was a beauty.
1)So, Suarez best position is a central winger.. Why does Kenny want Young, since he is a central winger too, and also Joe Cole seems to prefer that role?
2)Liverpool is in great shape.. Kenny has not miss a single big game since in charge (United in the FA cup does not count) and a win at Emirates is also highly probable -though it would be bad for the title race- . But, i will say that again : I want to see how he is going to build this side capable of winning easily weaker sides..
3)City is awful in big games. They demonstrated that once again. Only a win against Chelsea, and two boring ultra defensive 0-0 s against united and arsenal (i do not count the convincing victory against Roy). Mancini has still a lot to do if they want to claim the title next year..
Do you ‘not count the convincing victory against Roy’ because you’ve joined the rest of the world in appreciating that a game against Liverpool is no longer a ‘big game’?
Because i sympathise with Roy
He is actually a great manager for WBA, but his days made the club even smaller than what Rafa had created..
Young is a winger who’s occasionally been played as a “central winger” this year. Dalglish wants him because we obviously need a natural wide player to provide Carroll service, which Young is. (Meireles seems to do well on the wing in big games, when his defensive tenacity and discipline is more useful, but he’s something of a disaster on the wing against lower table teams).
Mancini will learn from this disaster, and Hopefully the next game will be totally different. Dalglish can’t have surprise on his hand all the time.
What surprise? The only thing remotely surprising about the starting lineup was that Flanagan was in it–this is exactly how we’ve been playing for weeks. I guess the other surprise was that Carroll had his first good game…
one important thing that you failed to notice is johnson was in the game and apart from the first 15 min when he was given the ball or city choose to play from the right after that till the end of the game he was anonymous on the pitch ball was never passed to him and most importantly it would be worth noting as to how many touches he really had in the game . second most important notable absentee was milner what was he doing on the pitch he is stupid and wright-phillips would be better off instead of him . balotelli’s work rate does not justifies his pay .
It seems like after every game we play against a lower table side away from home, I conclude that the 4-4-2 simply can’t work with the players we have and is a total disaster, and then, after every game against a top side, I conclude that with just a few tweaks (a natural winger, a left back, cover for Lucas), 4-4-2 really could be the way forward in the PL. As long as after this year, Meireles never has to play wide against a relegation-threatened team, I’ll be reasonably happy.
Suarez and Carroll really do look like they’re going to terrorize the league for years to come. Suarez probably had his worst full game in a Liverpool shirt yesterday (his touch, dribbling and shooting all seemed a little off) and he was *still* the most dangerous player on the pitch. If he’d been here all year, I don’t think anyone would be complaining about the lack of a true superstar in the PL this year. Carroll also showed why he can be very good–he’s one of the best in the world in the air, has a lethal left foot, is an instinctive finisher, works hard to win the ball back, and actually has decent movement. He has some obvious and serious weaknesses (pace and touch), but he’s got a lot going for him as well.
Great match, loved it.
If Liverpool are to buy anyone this summer i hope its Farfan from Schalke, he would complete the team.
This was a good match but the team still lacks deadly width and great out and out pace.
If not from the academy, then i hope ‘pool go after Farfan.
Something I’m missing in the report is the fact how poorly City attacked. It was incredibly rigid. Except Silva, no player tried to find space anywhere. Most of the time, everyone just held position and they played the ball sideways through the midfield line. Unbelievable how little ideas they had. Second full match I watched of City this season and neither of them showed any hint of a plan Mancini have with them when it comes to playing forwards.
Tactically the biggest impact to the match was, from my vantage point, basically playing Suarez in front of Carroll a lot of the time, or at least seeing them switch between the other as plays unfolded in their defensive third.
Unlike the match v. West Brom where Suarez was playing basically as a classic second striker, we saw time and again Suarez pressurizing MC’s defensive line with Carroll further into the second third. This allowed Carroll the space he needed to move into position rather than being isolated in a more or less fixed area around the box and with Suarez’ superb ball handling and hold up play it really caused MC fits.
With quality wingers likely coming in over the summer this kind of flexibility will only improve for LFC, but against MC I think we’ve just seen the first signs that LFC have something really special on their hands.