Fulham (H) Post Match Thread

[Buzzo]

Gerrard looked great yesterday. And good to see Agger back yesterday. What was up with Toure?

[Bender]

Gerrard looked great yesterday. And good to see Agger back yesterday. What was up with Toure?

slight injury

[Buzzo]

slight injury

Possibly a bit of fortune there! An on song Agger is a real asset to the team, good to see BR recognising we have been leaking goals recently.

[Fredo]

Brings last week's defeat into perspective eh? Chelsea nearly getting beaten at home was a great result for us, which shows that the league is going to be open till the end. It's anyone's league to win, and we're there with a fighting chance.

[cream]

Only saw the highlights this morning, we looked awesome. Great to see Agger, Coutinho and Johnson back in the team. Good to see Allen back too.

A top notch midfielder and back up for Johnson in Jan could set us up for a fantastic season.

[Robbie-9-Fowler]

Big performance yesterday, I know Fulham are **** but we needed to get back on track after last week and we delivered. What I like most about us is how we are dealing with like Fulham, West Brom and the mid-lower table teams. They've always caused us massive problem even during Rafa's time when we had a great team, Birmingham would often do us or Middlesborough or some **** would frustrate us. If we can pick up the odd point away to the big sides and hold our own at home then there is no reason why we can't finish in the top 4 and before the season I was adamant it was too early for us.

[wiw]

Anyone see MOTD? They highlighted Chelsea's main deficiency of not getting beyond West Brom's defence and playing mainly in front of them, and it really hammered home the fact that we are excellent at it for the most part, albeit against the smaller teams, but that is exactly how you beat them. Our passing and movement and fluidity when it clicks is top class. I know i'm stating the obvious but Coutinho is so so important to our team. The balance of the team with him in it looks perfect.

[I, Ravel Morrison]

What a fantastic weekend of results for us, with Arsenal, Man City and Spurs losing and Everton and Chelsea held to a draw.

[Muddled]

Any team on their day, is capable of beating anyone. If we can continue to put the so called lesser teams to the sword, get something from our home games against the big-guns and cross our fingers for something away, I genuinely think we could be in the hunt for the title.

Obviously we'll know more come January, but I think we'll see the Champions lose at least six times this season.

[Fosterbloke]

We're going to lose some games for sure. If the performance is there but the result isn't then I can accept that.

This is what disappointed me about the Arsenal performance the most, we didn't even get into 2nd gear. Against Newcastle, we pummelled them but it wasn't our day.

[MrMichael]

Fulham are awful but that was still a very convincing performance.

Now please, for the love of all that is good in the world, let that consign 3-5-2 to the dustbin of history, never to rear its ugly head ever again. I can totally see why with the personnel we had available it was worth experimenting with briefly, but I don't think it is even close to the answer long term and hamstrings us against both quality sides who can exploit it and well organised lesser teams who can easily setup to counter it.

Nobody can remotely convince me that it in any way is of real benefit to us to have a spare man wandering about our backline as we have in a 3-5-2 rather than adding an extra body to the weight of midfield or attack in any other system based on a 4 at the back. Indeed yesterday Lucas' screening role looked far more coherent and useful than it does with 3 CB's, the fb's (especially Johnson) were able to get forward at will, and the more advanced players looked to have real options in possession. If that defeat at Arsenal has helped Rodgers take a step back and return to the sort of system and formation we were obviously originally intended to employ this season before things got confused, then perhaps it could have been a blessing in disguise.

[I, Ravel Morrison]

Second that. I think the key element is Coutinho. We resorted to a 3-5-2 largely due to his absence, or more accurately, a player like him in his absence. In the past, a defensive midfielder was central to our attacking play. Now, it's probably a #10 like Coutinho. Hopefully Alberto or Suso (or Hughes when he gets here) can play there as an alternative.

[baitman]

not sure hughes will play as a 10, probably as a more traditional box to box midfield general.

the three at the back isnt the issue for me. i reckon if agger is the middle man then we dont need to defend as deep as when skrtel is in the middle.
skrtel is a great stopper, but not as mobile as agger usually is. agger can also step out and act as a deeper DM and allow the rest of the midfield to move closer to the attack, just leaving lucas sitting.

[Hemingway]

Fulham are awful but that was still a very convincing performance.

Now please, for the love of all that is good in the world, let that consign 3-5-2 to the dustbin of history, never to rear its ugly head ever again. I can totally see why with the personnel we had available it was worth experimenting with briefly, but I don't think it is even close to the answer long term and hamstrings us against both quality sides who can exploit it and well organised lesser teams who can easily setup to counter it.

Nobody can remotely convince me that it in any way is of real benefit to us to have a spare man wandering about our backline as we have in a 3-5-2 rather than adding an extra body to the weight of midfield or attack in any other system based on a 4 at the back. Indeed yesterday Lucas' screening role looked far more coherent and useful than it does with 3 CB's, the fb's (especially Johnson) were able to get forward at will, and the more advanced players looked to have real options in possession. If that defeat at Arsenal has helped Rodgers take a step back and return to the sort of system and formation we were obviously originally intended to employ this season before things got confused, then perhaps it could have been a blessing in disguise.

That's a bit harsh - the 3-5-2 has its place. It did its job fine when we thrashed West Brom (which is a much bigger feat than thrashing Fulham, as Chelsea just proved). I'd caution against drawing conclusions from both the most difficult and easiest games we've had to play so far this year. Not that I'm saying I want to return to it (at least not the way we played it), but I don't think this 4-4-2 is necessarily the longterm answer either. Still, being able to play both will prove useful.

[MrMichael]

That's a bit harsh - the 3-5-2 has its place. It did its job fine when we thrashed West Brom (which is a much bigger feat than thrashing Fulham, as Chelsea just proved). I'd caution against drawing conclusions from both the most difficult and easiest games we've had to play so far this year. Not that I'm saying I want to return to it (at least not the way we played it), but I don't think this 4-4-2 is necessarily the longterm answer either. Still, being able to play both will prove useful.

Nah, its not really harsh, I HATE 3 at the back (or 5), have done since the Roy Evans era and continue to. As I'm pretty sure I've said on here before, imo it is a formation only ever employed at LFC by managers who find themselves for whatever reason with a squad with too many central defenders and not enough elsewhere. Without Beckenbauer, Cafu and Facchetti in your squad I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole.

I agree about drawing conclusions from individual games in general, but imo that equally applies to the West Brom game, and if you look at the evidence of the season so far as a whole I believe I am correct suggesting that our record is better both in terms of points per game and goals conceded when we've played a back 4 as opposed to a 3. How we should set up in front of the defence I'm not so sure about, I can see arguments for all sorts of variations on 442, 433, 4231 etc, but I will never be happy seeing us go out with a 352/532 (even though I understand it has been close to a necessity at points with injuries etc).

While it will do fine in some games against some oppositions, and in others superior personnel will win out in the end despite the system, I just feel it has too many weaknesses that can be exploited by well organised teams playing 4-5-1, matching up against our midfield & attack, doubling up down the sides and overstretching our wing backs, while our 3 CBs aren't quite sure what they should be doing against a lone forward and none of them are really that amazing on the ball to be stepping forward (apart from Agger perhaps who wasn't even playing). I totally don't see the point in Skrtel, Sakho or Toure being the spare man. That's without even looking at how it effects Lucas - negatively I'd argue as it somewhat negates the point of his screening role.

Indeed the only thing it really seems to do well is enable us to play Sturridge and Suarez up top as a 2, but against quality opposition they can end up very isolated as the wingbacks get pushed back, the midfield is scrapping man v man, and our spare man is on the edge of our own box rather than joining them in the attacking third. I'd really like to think we can find another way to play S&S together just as effectively while retaining a regular back 4, and that while systems are absolutely not everything, I genuinely believe we will have a much better chance of top 4 if we do not persist with the "3 at the back" experiment any more than we absolutely have to.