Brendan Rodgers

[Muddled]

Can someone tell me what formation Rodgers actually plays ? is it a 4 2 3 1 ? that press's high up the pitch and if so was that not Rafa' s system ?

It's *defo* a 1-2-3-2-2-1 formation.

Coz Alex said so.

[cream]

Can someone tell me what formation Rodgers actually plays ? is it a 4 2 3 1 ? that press's high up the pitch and if so was that not Rafa' s system ?

He prefers a 4-3-3, pressing high up the pitch. Similar to Rafa, but bit more attacking. He has also said that formation will depend on the players he has at hos disposal.

[Nicey]

it's 1-2-3-2-2-1 I think. Don't quote me on it though.

[Muddled]

They pretty much wiped the floor with Chelsea too, the only thing they didn't do was score. Sorry but Chelsea no matter how much the press blow smoke up their arse. They were extremely lucky that night and on another day Barca's finishing could have been a lot more clinical and they would have won by about 5 goals

Oh, I agree - Chelsea rode their luck and I don't think that's the answer to counter a Barcelona style of football, but that kind of ploy with a little bit of work could be. Chelsea played with two sets of full backs which was well and truly setting their stall out to not let them past, but with a little tweaking, a new system could be an invitation to let the opposition come on top of them, surrender possession and then make a clinical counter in several swift, key passes - just speculation obviously, but trying to highlight an example of how it may evolve further.

Something I don't get is he's talked about relentless attacking football. Tiki Taka isn't that at all, it's patient controlled play matched by hard work to get the ball back to begin again.

+1.

Can someone tell me what formation Rodgers actually plays ? is it a 4 2 3 1 ? that press's high up the pitch and if so was that not Rafa' s system ?

1-4-3-3 in its simplest form.

[ric.williams]

i thought he did zones not formations?

[Nicey]

what ever he does its ****ing brilliant to watch ... I watched them all season last year , they were utterly brilliant ... so so so ****ing composed on the ball, little triangles everywhere .. had most teams chasing shadows

[Robbie-9-Fowler]

Oh, I agree - Chelsea rode their luck and I don't think that's the answer to counter a Barcelona style of football, but that kind of ploy with a little bit of work could be. Chelsea played with two sets of full backs which was well and truly setting their stall out to not let them past, but with a little tweaking, a new system could be an invitation to let the opposition come on top of them, surrender possession and then make a clinical counter in several swift, key passes - just speculation obviously, but trying to highlight an example of how it may evolve further.



+1.



1-4-3-3 in its simplest form.

We won't play it anything like Barcelona so I agree it may look evolved but we'll just be adapting because. 1) our players haven't grew up in that style of play 2) our players aren't good enough to do it the Barca way 3) even Barca without Messi look blunt at times, we don't have Messi

[Vermilion]

Is he relentless with his formation though ? Or have people noticed his sides adapting their style and shape during the game when needs must ?

[Muddled]

i thought he did zones not formations?

From my limited understanding, I think it's a formation, in which, the players are assigned to a zone.

[Corndog]

Something I don't get is he's talked about relentless attacking football. Tiki Taka isn't that at all, it's patient controlled play matched by hard work to get the ball back to begin again.

I thought he said he likes his team to rest whilst on the ball, keep it moving until the opposition experiences a lapse or becomes tired and then pounce by moving forward quickly. Depends on your interpretation of quotes i guess.

[Neil Young]

If he's any good, he'll be adapting his strategy and tactics as the world changes.

[Darkon]

From what I have understood about him, he is not really focused on a particular formation but rather a philosophy of how to play. Then he fit's the formation to the players available, while the underlying philosophy remains the same. The right way to do it IMO.

[Muddled]

We won't play it anything like Barcelona so I agree it may look evolved but we'll just be adapting because. 1) our players haven't grew up in that style of play 2) our players aren't good enough to do it the Barca way 3) even Barca without Messi look blunt at times, we don't have Messi

Indeed. I tried to avoid naming Barcelona in my original post, but it was the only way I could try and give an example to explain my point(s). We don't have the players (Henderson equals Iniesta, Adam equals Xavi etc!), so I'm not comparing the team, just how they couldn't get past a formation that was set up to counter tika taka*.

* I know Chelsea rode their luck and I'm not saying it's a long-term solution, just again, an example of how it has been countered and how they could be developed to be the new fad.

I'm living up to my username.

[Vermilion]

From what I have understood about him, he is not really focused on a particular formation but rather a philosophy of how to play. Then he fit's the formation to the players available, while the underlying philosophy remains the same. The right way to do it IMO.

You need to let players do what they do best, i'm all for that route, i hate seeing players out of position struggling, because they are having to do too much of what they do badly; and not enough of what they do well.

[Muddled]

From what I have understood about him, he is not really focused on a particular formation but rather a philosophy of how to play. Then he fit's the formation to the players available, while the underlying philosophy remains the same. The right way to do it IMO.

An interesting take on it, which kinda ties in with this:

If he's any good, he'll be adapting his strategy and tactics as the world changes.