Liverpoool v Man City Post Match thread

[Craig_H]

You have to find a way to deliver. You need to beat your man, the way you do it is irrelevant. Off the ball movement is a way to beat your man, it's not just dribbling and doing step overs, that's not what I mean.

So you dont think it's possible for a player to cross the ball from a wide position, without beating their man. Correct?

[JohnDoe]

When did Benayoun join? Was he with us one season or two?

Three. He joined same summer with Torres.

[Neil Young]

Three. He joined same summer with Torres.

Wow, really? He wasn't up to much most of the time then. Or my memory's worse than I, um, er, where was I, hang on...

[JohnDoe]

So you dont think it's possible for a player to cross the ball from a wide position, without beating their man. Correct?

If you understand what beating a man is in my eyes, yes.

Can a striker score without avoiding to be closed down by his defenders? No.

[Neil Young]

If you understand what beating a man is in my eyes, yes.

Can a striker score without avoiding to be closed down by his defenders? No.

Unless he's playing against Wigan.

[JohnDoe]

Wow, really? He wasn't up to much most of the time then. Or my memory's worse than I, um, er, where was I, hang on...

Kuyt was also decent with Riera on the left. Basically, a creative presence on the other flank helps Kuyt's game. Benayoun is better than Riera so I mentioned him.

[JohnDoe]

Unless he's playing against Wigan.

I wanted to mention opposition errors are also a way but that's a given. A good side doesn't rely on the opposition to make an error, it forces them to make errors by committing.

[JohnDoe]

I see what you're getting at. I think the theory is the ball is played to the "wide-man" first who draws the defending fullback towards him. This creates the space for the attacking fullback to overlap into the space. So yes, the fullback isn't the initial threat. At least that's how I understand it.

However this does rely on the ball getting to the "wide-man" in the first place, and that player then having the skill to get the ball the the overlapping fullback. Both of which we seem to have issues with at the moment.

Exactly, a "winger" who can't "wing", hinders his full back, whatever the formation is. It doesn't matter which kind of player you're talking about and what kind of threat he poses (A natural winger or a Pires type player), he needs to create that initial threat that gives the full back the space to become the second wave.

Players who are "non threats" are liabilities unless they can work themselves into good positions within the offense, they're usually good off the ball movers. A team filled with those types of players (like we are), will suffer, as there just aren't enough threats to create for them.

A "threat" is a guy like Adam Johnson. A "non threat" is someone like Ji Sung Park or Kuyt, they can work within a team and be extremely successful, but too many of them defeats their purpose.

[Craig_H]

If you understand what beating a man is in my eyes, yes.

Can a striker score without avoiding to be closed down by his defenders? No.

I have no idea what you're on about, but i've seen numerous wide players cross into the box without beating their man. Beckham made a career of it.

[JohnDoe]

I have no idea what you're on about, but i've seen numerous wide players cross into the box without beating their man. Beckham made a career of it.

Again, the Beckham example. If he was capable of putting in crosses that reached their target, he essentially beat his man, as his man couldn't stop him from delivering.

The ability to cross accurately from deep gave him an advantage as he didn't need to beat him by other means, but he still beat him. He was still a threat.

If Kuyt could cross like Beckham, I wouldn't have any issues with him not being able to beat his man by other means other than his movement. He does it once in a while, but not in a strong enough probability that can win matches consistently.

[CJ]

I have no idea what you're on about, but i've seen numerous wide players cross into the box without beating their man. Beckham made a career of it.

go here

https://www.amazon.co.uk/johndspatented15minscoutingmethod.html

that should explain everything and a snip at 50.99p

[Craig_H]

Again, the Beckham example. If he was capable of putting in crosses that reached their target, he essentially beat his man, as his man couldn't stop him from delivering.

The ability to cross accurately from deep gave him an advantage as he didn't need to beat him by other means, but he still beat him. He was still a threat.

If Kuyt could cross like Beckham, I wouldn't have any issues with him not being able to beat his man by other means other than his movement. He does it once in a while, but not in a strong enough probability that can win matches consistently.

You interpretation of 'beating a man' is very different from mine. And 99.9% of people i discuss football with. You're the 0.1%.

[Craig_H]

go here

https://www.amazon.co.uk/johndspatented15minscoutingmethod.html

that should explain everything and a snip at 50.99p

Looking for something?
We're sorry. The Web address you entered is not a functioning page on our site.

Go to Amazon.co.uk's Home Page

[JohnDoe]

You interpretation of 'beating a man' is very different from mine. And 99.9% of people i discuss football with. You're the 0.1%.

The interpretation doesn't matter, you can call it what you want, I guess. Call it the ability to deliver then. I see the ability to deliver as the ability to prevent my defender from preventing me to deliver

I'm just kidding now, but surely you actually do understand what I am saying. Unlike Marsh, who's just trying to wind me up.

[CJ]

Looking for something?
We're sorry. The Web address you entered is not a functioning page on our site.

Go to Amazon.co.uk's Home Page

soemthing like

www. amazon . co . uk / johnds fifteen minute scouting method . html

obvously the page didnt exist.