Pack your bags Roy

[kris90210]

Well I think we can guess what style of football hes trying to impliment

He himself said hes been doing the same thing for 35 years and doesnt see the need to change

I think Rafa played for draws at times away from home not sure he did the same at home despite the two holding midfielders he played

Rafas game was more about controlling the opposition than actually playing for a specific result I suppose its the same philosophy as Paisley had win the battle, quieten the opposition, control the game, play your football, win the game

The only problem with Rafa was executing the final part for whatever reason

I dont think Roy shares those same ideals much like Houllier didnt

Its different tactics for different people but frankly I'm still non-plussed by Roy's maybe its me being greedy and wanting more

Yeah we can guess, but until he's had time to stamp his ideas on the club then it's a little unfair to do that in my opinion. All I know is that the team has started to play better. Let's see how we do over the next few weeks.

Agree with you on Rafa. We were missing a couple of pieces of the jigsaw - a backup striker and world class winger. If (big if I know) we'd had the right two players, I'm convinced Rafa would have won us the league.

There's nothing greedy about wanting to see the team we support playing good football. We all want the same thing. Right now though, I think results are more important.

[Lecter]

There really ain't no reasoning with you.

Explain to me the season we came second, and why we got so many draws. Explain to me how in each of those games we set out for the win? Explain to me how so many fans bemoaned the negative tactics employed against the likes of Wigan, Sunderland etc. Rafa's main fault was worrying too much about the opposition, instead of making them worry about us. We became a team hard to beat, but not a team hard to contain.

Did Rafa worry about the opposition or was it more to do with controlling the game and dictating the play

You could probably argue for the next 6 months as to which was the case

I wasnt too bothered with that system nor with Mascherano & Alonso playing in those games

Last season though the two holding midfielders (Lucas & Mascherano) were a massive problem

[Craig_H]

Spot on, when you line up with 2 DM's at home even against weak oppostion, especially when those DM's are Lucas & Masch who are not exactly known for the attacking prowess, your setting out for a specific type of approach, which is solid and not to lose first and foremost.

I would suggest that he was setting out for an approach where we controlled the game and controlled possession.

And every single manager sets out not to lose. It's folly to suggest otherwise. Whether it's at the expense of proactively seeking to go and WIN the game, and to what extent, is certainly one that's open to debate.

[danperkins]

I have already done that one time. Search and you will find it. We got so many draws because we didn't score enough goals even that we totally bossed almost every one of the games in question. The only thing the manager can do is to set up the team to boss the games and to set it up to create chances. He can't score the goals himself.

We created a lot of chances and totally bossed the games that means that Rafa got it right. He can't score the goals himself.

Did you not including shots off target too? The main problem was we couldn't break teams down and had no width so we resorted to long range efforts and passing the balls around aimlessly in the middle of the park. Keep saying to you the stats do lie. Much better served actually watching the game to see what went on.

[Craig_H]

I have already done that one time. Search and you will find it. We got so many draws because we didn't score enough goals even that we totally bossed almost every one of the games in question. The only thing the manager can do is to set up the team to boss the games and to set it up to create chances. He can't score the goals himself.

We created a lot of chances and totally bossed the games that means that Rafa got it right. He can't score the goals himself.

To be fair though, there were a lot of games where we didnt really create lots of clear cut chances.

And i'm of the opinion that, late in a game, when you're looking to score a winner, you increase your chances of doing so if you get more bodies into the box while you're attacking. The more bodies you have in a dangerous area, the more likely that a chance might drop to one of them.

That's what United have done so well over the years - when they need to score, they commit bodies forward in numbers - and it's no coincidence that they're known for getting late winners.

Rafa was a little too rigid with his 4231, to the point that, whatever the circumstances, even if we desperately needed a goal late on, he didnt find it easy to change the system. He'd make subs, but it'd usually be like-for-like, so if a striker came on, one would go off.

It's not something which helped him or us, IMO.

[banditos]

Yes, I remember it well.

So you're suggesting we're already at stage 2 of Hodger's master plan?

Not at all. I'm not sure Bodge has a master plan, he's just sticking to a system that has work well for him for 35 years, dont ya know.

I was suggesting that defensive solidity and counter attacking football probably shouldn't be our ultimate aim. It's probably not what most LFC fans want to see either. Works well for Mourinho, but he's had some pretty tasty sqauds to chose from of late.

[Lecter]

Don't get me wrong, i'm not enamoured with Roy's style of football, cos so far it's not been much to write home about.

But Rafa was negative in my opinion, too often obsessed with containing the opposition and worrying about them instead of making them worry about us. The number of times i, and others, were crying out for him to ditch the 2 DM philosophy, unless against the big boys, in match threads.

Like i said, we became difficult to beat, but not difficult to contain...how many times did a small, defensive team stop us from scoring, thus costing us valuable points?



.

Containing and controlling the game is different to being negative though

I still not convinced Rafa worried too much about the opposition certainly no more than someone like Paisley did

Both shared similar game plans ie controlling games would get you rewards the major problem for Rafa was Uncle Bob had far better attacking players who could influence games than Rafa did

Looking at our personnel I'm not sure what changes Rafa could have made that would have won us the title that season

We probably achieved the maximum capable out of that particular squad

[Arn]

I would suggest that he was setting out for an approach where we controlled the game and controlled possession.

And every single manager sets out not to lose. It's folly to suggest otherwise. Whether it's at the expense of proactively seeking to go and WIN the game, and to what extent, is certainly one that's open to debate.

And we controlled almost every game at home until last season. We almost never allowed the opposition to attack us at Anfield. Rafa made that into a fortress again.

There isn't a single team that will control game after game away from home in the PL. You set up the team in a different way away from home and to control the game in a more defensive way.

[kris90210]

I dont see your point here kris. CL games against Chelsea - he set up to win the TIE. Maybe not the 1st leg, but the objective is to go through, so he set up to win the tie.

Likewise in the group phase, the objective is to qualify, and preferably to top the group. You dont necessarily take those games on an individual basis, you look at the whole makeup of the group and set up to try and win it. Not necessary to win every game there.

But he set us up to achieve the objective - in league games, that's generally to win the game.

My main point was in response to Arn's assertion that Rafa ALWAYS set up to win every game. Which is just wrong.

But while we're on the subject, you've just been saying that Roy was wrong for playing defensively for 45 mins yesterday. That this was the wrong way to go about achieving the objective of maintaining our 2-0 lead. We played that way against Chelsea for about 176 mins the season we won the Champions League. Do you think there are any inconsistencies in your viewpoint on this?

[danperkins]

I would suggest that he was setting out for an approach where we controlled the game and controlled possession.

And every single manager sets out not to lose. It's folly to suggest otherwise. Whether it's at the expense of proactively seeking to go and WIN the game, and to what extent, is certainly one that's open to debate.

Personally i thought Rafa set his team up with the fine details, solid,compact and functional. Firstly not to lose and then maybe nick a goal. Rarely last season in particular, did we control games IMO, nor did we really control possession.

Suppose it depends on what your definition of what possession is, if its Carra passing it to Skrtel, Skrtel passing it back to Carra, Carra passing it to Masch, Masch passing it Lucas, Lucas passing it to Carra, and Carra booting the living piss out of it and...... giving it straight back to the opposition well then power to you. My definition of having effective possession is having it in the right areas, and making that possession count for something.

Aimless, one dimensional passing in teh CM beween Lucas and Masch, or in defense between Carra and Skrtel etc was so frustrating last season.

What i saw last season, and this is "IMO" incase i'm being accused of saying its fact, is teams very happy to concede possession against us, sitting back deep, nicely compact and tight, knowing well we offer nothing in the wide areas so packing the central areas, in which it was inevitable the ball was going to come back into, proved very effective against us and we seemed to run out of ideas and lacked the guile and craft to break certain teams down.

Setting up your team at Anfield with 2 DM's, especially when those players are Lucas and Masch against the lesser opposition, is negative and bizarre "IMO" , having Alonso there with Masch is completely different story.

[Scratch]

Looking at our personnel I'm not sure what changes Rafa could have made that would have won us the title that season

We probably achieved the maximum capable out of that particular squad

That's where i disagree with you tho...if we'd gone for it, against teams we should have done, i think we'd have come out better...yes, we may have conceded a late loser, but we may have also scored some.

8 draws is 8 points...2 wins, 2 draws and 4 loses is still 8 points...3 wins and 5 loses is 9 points, and i reckon we could have easily achieved that...4 wins 4 loses and that's 4 extra points...i just wish we could have gone for it, rather than not.

It was frustrating, watching us dominate possession, to see that Masch for example was doing very little (not his fault, but because we were in control) and not taking him off and bringing on someone else for their defensive line to worry about. And it happened on so many occassions that season.

[Craig_H]

My main point was in response to Arn's assertion that Rafa ALWAYS set up to win every game. Which is just wrong.

But while we're on the subject, you've just been saying that Roy was wrong for playing defensively for 45 mins yesterday. That this was the wrong way to go about achieving the objective of maintaining our 2-0 lead. We played that way against Chelsea for about 176 mins the season we won the Champions League. Do you think there are any inconsistencies in your viewpoint on this?

Not really, because our team when we played them in 2005, was vastly inferior to that which we have now.

Sitting on the edge of your own box for 45 mins is potentially suicidal, whichever way you look at it. Smaller clubs do it because they have an inferiority complex which tells them they cant set up higher up the park because they'll leave space behind and get destroyed. We're not a club or team of that ilk, though. Unfortunately, as a manager, it's all Roy's been used to, which explains why we're doing it. He needs to snap out of it though.

[Lecter]

That's where i disagree with you tho...if we'd gone for it, against teams we should have done, i think we'd have come out better...yes, we may have conceded a late loser, but we may have also scored some.

8 draws is 8 points...2 wins, 2 draws and 4 loses is still 8 points...3 wins and 5 loses is 9 points, and i reckon we could have easily achieved that...4 wins 4 loses and that's 4 extra points...i just wish we could have gone for it, rather than not.

It was frustrating, watching us dominate possession, to see that Masch for example was doing very little (not his fault, but because we were in control) and not taking him off and bringing on someone else for their defensive line to worry about. And it happened on so many occassions that season.

As I said looking at what we had on the bench I'm not convinced taking Mascherano off and bringing on one of Voronin, Babel or Riera would have made too much difference

[Scratch]

Anyway, basically my argument was against Arn's stipulation that Rafa set out to win every game, which i think is a rash statement to make, and one that even he cannot seriously believe?

[Craig_H]

That's where i disagree with you tho...if we'd gone for it, against teams we should have done, i think we'd have come out better...yes, we may have conceded a late loser, but we may have also scored some.

8 draws is 8 points...2 wins, 2 draws and 4 loses is still 8 points...3 wins and 5 loses is 9 points, and i reckon we could have easily achieved that...4 wins 4 loses and that's 4 extra points...i just wish we could have gone for it, rather than not.

It was frustrating, watching us dominate possession, to see that Masch for example was doing very little (not his fault, but because we were in control) and not taking him off and bringing on someone else for their defensive line to worry about. And it happened on so many occassions that season.

Whilst the points issue is a no brainer, there's another value to not losing which is important, and that's to do with momentum, confidence and habits.