Brendan Rodgers

[Fredo]

Nice essay Perky.

We play Coutinho out left because there is Suarez and Sturridge in the middle and because normally we don't play a typical 442. It's either a 4-1-1-2-2 or a 4-3-3, so in a 4-3-3 Coutinho has to play on the left.

[Muddled]

Strange thing to say.

Yeah, that's the bit I picked up on too. Odd.

'Long after I'm gone? I'm hoping Ilori will be coming good in the next couple of seasons.

[Sarb]

Is there a quote from Rodgers where he states that?

It will be the general stand-back'edness in the articles today as to wanting 1st team quality signings in the summer and not having got them. It's pretty clear reading between the lines that 'The Committee' is getting it in the neck. He was talking on the weekend about quality in the squad etc.

Like I said. I really like the guy and I like the way we play. We've had an iffy result against Hull. All teams have them. He should have just batted away questions on signings as it's just one result. City lost a few games to teams they should have despatched this season. **** happens.

But say you look at our worst results of the season (Southampton and Hull). Were they down to the squad or were they down to team selections? For me, they had nothing to do with the signings we made in the summer. Playing 4 CB's against Soton was wrong. Playing Moses and Sterling against Hull was also wrong.

Ilori is going to feel pretty **** reading that quote

[Fredo]

It will be the general stand-back'edness in the articles today as to wanting 1st team quality signings in the summer and not having got them. It's pretty clear reading between the lines that 'The Committee' is getting it in the neck. He was talking on the weekend about quality in the squad etc.

Like I said. I really like the guy and I like the way we play. We've had an iffy result against Hull. All teams have them. He should have just batted away questions on signings as it's just one result. City lost a few games to teams they should have despatched this season. **** happens.

But say you look at our worst results of the season (Southampton and Hull). Were they down to the squad or were they down to team selections? For me, they had nothing to do with the signings we made in the summer. Playing 4 CB's against Soton was wrong. Playing Moses and Sterling against Hull was also wrong.

Ilori is going to feel pretty **** reading that quote

But have we asked ourselves that the performance against Hull was just because players didn't perform on the day? From what I was looking, we had Suarez, Moses, Sterling, Toure and Johnson who were completely off their usual level, so it should have contributed how mediocre we were.

In that instance, it's not a squad problem, but a consistency issue.

[Sarb]

But have we asked ourselves that the performance against Hull was just because players didn't perform on the day? From what I was looking, we had Suarez, Moses, Sterling, Toure and Johnson who were completely off their usual level, so it should have contributed how mediocre we were.

In that instance, it's not a squad problem, but a consistency issue.

I think the players were off a level too. Either way, I don't believe it was a squad or signings issue. Therefore, I don't believe the comments and articles are justified

[dww]

The criticism of Rodgers having spent millions on players that either don't play or haven't shown enough up to now is fair enough. It's got to be said though, that those players need a bit of time to bed in before we sharpen the knives and deem them as not good enough. I remember when Arsenal were spending millions on 'unproven' talent who, at the time, were sitting on their bench or playing in their reserves.

It's unfortunate that we aren't in the League cup anymore, as that would have given some of them some game time. It's all about development and biding our time I guess. We've already improved compared to last season, so criticism is fine unless it's uncalled for; *cough*Tanner*cough.

I think the point about development/blending a squad taking time makes sense. I will be holding off on judgments on players for a little while.

That said I have reservations about how we are going about blending/acclimatizing players. For my money the problems in the last few games have generally stemmed from a lack of cohesion at the back. I can't shake the feeling that sticking with a centreback pairing would help. We haven't always be able to do that but we should at least try to keep the same types of CB. Against Hull Toure and Skrtel both seemed to want to be both the deepest CB and the right most CB.

[el matador]

Yeah I can see that going after the likes of Costa, Henrikh and Willian but then settling for Moses is a bit odd. But maybe they didn't/couldn't sign the other alternative whoever that was.

We needed a CB more than we needed that type of player imo. Signing Sakho was a coup. But our defence is still a mess and he doesn't get a game. Even in January, I wouldn't be going for a No. 10 first. I'd be looking at a defensive midfielder, and another central midfielder along with a LB. Only then would I be looking at a forward or attacking mid.

the whole costa, mkhitrayan, willian affair probably told us what we need to know.

none of the players are similar to each other so it begs the question just what type of 10 were we looking for. Mkhitrayan is a workhorse with an eye for goal, willian has the skills and costa has plenty of power.

but all completely different. where is the consistency in the search for what we need ?

[RichC]

the whole costa, mkhitrayan, willian affair probably told us what we need to know.

none of the players are similar to each other so it begs the question just what type of 10 were we looking for. Mkhitrayan is a workhorse with an eye for goal, willian has the skills and costa has plenty of power.

but all completely different. where is the consistency in the search for what we need ?

I'd imagine it's also down to the best possible player available, it seems that holes are being picked out of nothing here.

And actually they are play in a similar role but in a different style so the concept of the role we wanted filled was there and then there are different options that we're available.

[Frenchie]

BR is playing a game at the moment, his comment about Ilori coming good perhaps "after he is long gone" smacks of contract renegotiation plus a bunch of other off the cuff comments.

Don't get me wrong I like him and he seems to understand the needs of the fans.

However I am sick of the self congratulatory official site especially the constant questions about how great everyone/thing is at Melwood etc, all the players asked obviously embarrassing questions about Stevie G, the fans, atmosphere, history..

WTF are they going to reply?.."the atmosphere is ****e?" "it's a small club living in the past?" extreme examples but you might just get what I mean....

BR is trying to become the grand poobah of everything and that is exactly what FSG didn't want but are being sucked in to appease him...

Hate saying this but Arn had some points regarding this but unfortunately was as mad as a box of frogs in his ability to convey it rationally (and once).

We are trying too hard to be Barcelona without the quality players and no plan B.

It may well work out and he could become the living messiah but I cannot see FSG giving him the power and sufficient funds to buy the players that would take us there.

Nor can I see the elite players joining until we are cemented into the top 4 with Champions League guaranteed.

So the only way is to buy the upcoming stars at 21-25 not making it at the elite clubs like Tello etc which seems to be the way we are going but that is fraught with risks i.e. Aspas, Borini whom on paper were the right sort of acquisitions.

For every Coutinho there will be 2 or 3 Aspas'.....


....and don't get me started on the midlife crisis, pantomime dame that is Ayre...

[fidget]

....and don't get me started on the midlife crisis, pantomime dame that is Ayre...

Oh no he isn't.

[Frenchie]

look behind you

[Mostar]

Yeah I can see that going after the likes of Costa, Henrikh and Willian but then settling for Moses is a bit odd. But maybe they didn't/couldn't sign the other alternative whoever that was.

We needed a CB more than we needed that type of player imo. Signing Sakho was a coup. But our defence is still a mess and he doesn't get a game. Even in January, I wouldn't be going for a No. 10 first. I'd be looking at a defensive midfielder, and another central midfielder along with a LB. Only then would I be looking at a forward or attacking mid.

We wasted a great deal of time pursuing those players and in the end either they didn't want to join us due to lack of CL football and/or because of our unwillingness to pay above what we considered to be the fair value led to what it led.

I cannot see much changing unless we make it to CL and/or decide to spend more on good quality transfer targets and n the process relax our wage structure somewhat.

One positive is all that is that even though we didn't land too many quality players this summer the players we were actively pursuing, for the most part, would have been very good signings for us.

Sarb mate, you've gone all 'Craig H' on us these last couple of days.

There is only one Craig H

I think the point about development/blending a squad taking time makes sense. I will be holding off on judgments on players for a little while.

That said I have reservations about how we are going about blending/acclimatizing players. For my money the problems in the last few games have generally stemmed from a lack of cohesion at the back. I can't shake the feeling that sticking with a centreback pairing would help. We haven't always be able to do that but we should at least try to keep the same types of CB. Against Hull Toure and Skrtel both seemed to want to be both the deepest CB and the right most CB.

[peekay]

Daniel Agger was left out of Liverpool's defence against Hull City for 'tactical reasons', says his manager Brendan Rodgers. Photograph: Matt West/BPI/Rex
Brendan Rodgers has acknowledged that getting his defensive partnerships right is now a priority at Anfield. Liverpool's manager has seen his side concede six goals in th eir last two games, placing his decision to revert to a back four following a prolonged experiment with 3-4-1-2 under scrutiny.

The return to four at the back came following a 2-0 reverse at Arsenal last month and coincided with an emphatic thrashing of Fulham but, since then, Liverpool have drawn the Merseyside derby at Everton 3-3 and lost 3-1 at Hull on Sunday.

"Central defence is an important area of the team and it's something I need to look at to get that consistency," said Rodgers. "There has been lots of change and some of that has been down to me, knowing every game is an absolute cup final for us. If I feel I need to change the defence going into a game to get a result then I will do so. But from the coaching perspective, I need to consider that a little run in the team (for a settled centre-half partnership) might breed consistency even if we have to change a number of other positions.

"The last couple of games we've been disappointed with the goals we've conceded and obviously we've made mistakes. The difficulty for us has been getting that balance and a partnership that can cope with all types of strikers."

Whether Kolo Touré and Martin Skrtel, Rodgers' preferred centre-back combination at the moment, represent Liverpool's optimal pairing is a moot point. Considerable controversy surrounds Daniel Agger's current role on the bench.

"I know his quality," said Rogers when questioned about Agger before claiming that the defender's omission was "simply tactical" and designed to confound physically imposing strikers.

"I just felt we have struggled at times against big physical opponents so Touré has obviously coped well with that type of player," said Liverpool's manager. "So that was the idea, putting him in, and obviously Skrtel has been excellent since coming in. It was simply tactical."

Like Agger, Mamadou Sakho – previously a key component of Liverpool's back three – is currently benched but Rodgers has always believed Sakho is more one for the future.

"The idea was to bring him in to develop but Sakho came in and challenged (for the first team)," he said. "There's no real change to that. He came in at a time when we went to a back three and did reasonably well. He's now working very hard to come back into the starting lineup.

"That's where we're at. He's a good player, an international and if he's working well enough in training and the team is not doing so well, it could open up the door for him."

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/dec/03/liverpool-brendan-rodgers-central-defence-sakho

[Yozza]

Stop trying to be too clever Brendan

[Sarb]

Sorry. But Sakho...one for the future, signed to develop? Firstly, we dont develop anyone. Secondly the guy is a first team player (not playing when we signed him but that is PSG and money) and was the Captain of PSG.

Also, if he thinks Agger and Skrtel are now the solution...why? He tried that partnership for half a season and the result was he brought a 36 year old back into the team. He has lost any idea when it comes to the defence imo and I hate saying that