tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33779660.post6356089221160612656..comments2023-12-22T01:47:49.178-05:00Comments on oh you beauty: Trying to Find a Balancenatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10043601945557998732noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33779660.post-79490769314605769882011-11-01T02:29:27.473-04:002011-11-01T02:29:27.473-04:00Great post.
It is very interesting watching this...Great post. <br /><br />It is very interesting watching this Liverpool team evolve and find an identity. Having watched previous incarnations, the number of talented players in the current squad excites me about what this team can achieve given time to gel. Some of the long balls Enrique plays from the flanks are astounding and I can think of a few that should have been converted into goals. Anyway, great informative post.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33779660.post-57615663901989814802011-10-31T12:59:59.001-04:002011-10-31T12:59:59.001-04:00I think the answer to your question, to take the e...I think the answer to your question, to take the easy way out, is "both." West Brom were unambitious and Johnson's ability going forward, pinning the opposite full-back and winger deeper than Kelly or Flanagan, assuredly helped.<br /><br />Of course, 'why didn't it work against Sunderland' could be answered by many other explanations: because it was Liverpool's (and Henderson's) first game, not having time to build up these still-maturing understandings; because Larsson scored an unrepeatable wonder-goal; because Suarez missed a penalty and Dowd didn't send off Richardson; etc, etc.<br /><br />Looking at that average position diagram, both central defenders look vulnerable. Enrique gets forward just as much as Johnson, and actually created more chances. The key to not being wholly vulnerable was (in addition to West Brom's oft-mentioned passiveness) Lucas.<br /><br />Lucas' average position was deeper than against <a href="http://soccernet.espn.go.com/gamecast?id=318117" rel="nofollow">United</a>, <a href="http://soccernet.espn.go.com/gamecast?id=318134" rel="nofollow">Arsenal</a>, <a href="http://soccernet.espn.go.com/gamecast?id=318098" rel="nofollow">Stoke</a>, <a href="http://soccernet.espn.go.com/gamecast?id=317952" rel="nofollow">Sunderland</a>, or <a href="http://soccernet.espn.go.com/gamecast?id=318147" rel="nofollow">Wolves</a> (the closest comparison). Look where his tackles and interceptions took place on Saturday: <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/chalkboards/Fz32G1262o9c5Yq0w1Qt" rel="nofollow">chalkboard</a>. Mostly on the flanks, and slightly more on the right. I hate hammering the same point, his importance to this side, but it's increasingly true.natehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10043601945557998732noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33779660.post-32661820242697103682011-10-31T12:36:35.218-04:002011-10-31T12:36:35.218-04:00Good stuff here.
You're right about the form...Good stuff here. <br /><br />You're right about the formation. I think this has been Dalglish's intention from day one bringing Henderson in as a CM/RM hybrid (many wondered which he would play, answer seems to be both).<br /><br />What's interesting to me is, Henderson's been doing this since the first match against Sunderland, tucking inside on the right. But he got blasted on the blogs for it (not giving enough "cover" to the right back). Why did it work against WBA, but not against Sunderland. You'd think with Glen Johnson bombing forward, it would've been even more of an issue with that right flank wide open. It Seems however, that it might've actually helped things. So my question: Did this work against WBA exclusively because of their passiveness, or did it work because johnson going forward more actually took the pressure OFF of henderson to defend (somehow). In that formation chart, doesn't skrtel look awfully vulnerable back there on the right?Sethnoreply@blogger.com