Liverpool Goals By Position

Sometimes, it seems as if Suarez has scored almost every Liverpool goal. If not for the striker, Liverpool would rarely tally.



39.3% of this season's goals have been scored by strikers, 14.3% by wide forwards, 21.4% by central midfielders, 7.1% by fullbacks, 8.9% by center backs, and 8.9% via own goals.

And how does that compare that to last season?



39.2% by the strikers, 21.5% by the wingers, 19.0% by central midfielders, 2.5% by fullbacks, 8.8% by center backs, and 8.8% via own goals.

So, not much difference. Suarez has scored more, but Liverpool had more strikers last season, especially since Dalglish used 4-4-2 about as often as any other formation. There have been fewer goals via the wide players, which isn't much surprise given that Maxi, Kuyt, and Bellamy (responsible for 15 of those 17 goals) aren't with the club anymore. And there has been a higher percentage from central midfielders and full-backs. Again, no surprise: Liverpool have used more central midfielders because Rodgers doesn't play 4-4-2 and Gerrard's actually been healthy this season (*knocks feverishly on wood*), and Johnson's in far better form (plus Downing and Wisdom have also chipped in with one each from full-back).



Caveats:

1) These totals are taken from how I saw the formations in each match, using my game notes, match reviews, and videos of goals. So some might argue with how I classified each formation and position. If you'd like, I can put full lists of positions and formations in the comments section, but it'll take up way too much space here.

2) Aside from the three times when Liverpool played three at the back (and failed to score) during matches against Everton, Chelsea, and Anzhi, the side has always used some variation of 4-3-3, whether 4-2-3-1 or 4-1-2-3. So classifying which goal came from which position was fairly straightforward, except for the rare cases where players switched mid-match (e.g. Downing moving to left-back mid-match against Anzhi).

However, in 2011-12, Liverpool used 4-4-2 and some variation of 4-5-1 almost equally, starting in a 4-4-2 in 23 matches and either 4-2-3-1, 4-1-4-1, or 4-3-3 in 27 matches (plus 3-4-2-1 in the 0-0 against Stoke). So, some of Bellamy's goals came as a striker (4), some as a winger (5). Similar goes for Kuyt. By my count, 45 of Liverpool's 79 goals last season came when playing 4-4-2, 34 when playing some version of 4-5-1.

3) In addition, there were matches where Dalglish altered the formation during the match, usually changing from 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 to 4-4-2 – as against United, Brighton, and Chelsea in the FA Cup; Wigan and Villa in the league (and a couple of others), most often when either behind or level.


Thanks to Meru from Berkeley for suggesting this infographic via email, and for the multiple people who reminded me that Downing's goal against Anzhi came from left-back when I attempted to be clever on Twitter this morning. It's a good thing that many of you are smarter than I am.

On Brendan Rodgers

Rodgers' appointment is imminent according to the BBC and Liverpool Echo, although we're still waiting for confirmation from the club.

Biography Snapshot
Born: 26 January 1973, Carnlough, Northern Ireland
Teams Managed: Swansea (July 2010 - May 2012), Reading (June 2009 - December 2009), Watford (November 2008 - June 2009)
Career Record: 151 matches (62W-33D-56L)

We might as well get the feared, loaded question out of the way up front. Is Brendan Rodgers the new flavor of the month?

There's no comparison – whether in tactics, personality, résumé, or otherwise – to the last time Liverpool hired a flavor of the month. But could Rodgers end up as this season's Owen Coyle?

No matter who FSG chose to replace Dalglish, it would have been a gamble. Martinez? Almost as inexperienced, although Rodgers has a "big club" background due to his time with Mourinho's Chelsea. Villas-Boas spectacularly failed in his last job, and was seemingly ruled out earlier in the process. The fans' choice, Rafa Benitez, was a non-starter; FSG had already been burned by reaching backwards, although Hodgson's inability to do anything right forced their hand in regards to Dalglish. They weren't going to make that mistake again, especially considering the baggage Benitez carries with a distinct segment of Liverpool fans and the British press, as well as his renowned demand for total control. Guardiola, Klopp? Not interested. Capello? Another who'd probably demand more control than FSG were willing to give and with little room for growth given his long CV.

It appears that the choice came down to Martinez or Rodgers. Two of the youngest managers in the league, one who's been in the league for just one season, the other who's never finished above 15th in his three top-tier seasons. FSG are obviously building with the long-term in mind.

Rodgers, unlike Martinez, has a preferred system. His sides play 4-3-3. Martinez's Wigan played every variation of 4-5-1 under the sun in addition to the much-written-about 3-4-3, with varying levels of success. Rodgers' Swansea side used the same formula in nearly every fixture this season: a moderately high defensive line focused on short passes and building from the back, three central midfielders, two fleet-footed wingers-cum-forwards, and a central striker.

Sure, call it 4-2-3-1 if you want – that often what Swansea looked like without the ball, Allen got forward from midfield more than Gower or Britton, and Dyer and Sinclair were as much wingers as wide forwards. Unlike other 4-2-3-1s, even when Allen got forward, he looked more a part of the central midfield than one of the attackers. This probably wouldn't be Rafa Benitez's 4-2-3-1, the style still used to define that formation in most Liverpool fans' minds.

More important than the formation are the ideas behind it. Rodgers, whose managerial lineage traces directly back to Jose Mourinho, is clearly a devotee of Barcelona and Spain's tiki-taka football – mentioned in almost anything written about Rodgers' Swansea and excellently summarized by the first half of this blog post. Two recent interviews are required reading: from the Telegraph in January and the Guardian prior to the May meeting with Liverpool, which are the sources of his subsequent quotes.

“I like to control games. I like to be responsible for our own destiny. If you are better than your opponent with the ball you have a 79 per cent chance of winning the game. For me it is quite logical. It doesn’t matter how big or small you are, if you don’t have the ball you can’t score.”

For fans reared by Benitez's Liverpool, this is a comforting quote. His Liverpool sides also dictated possession, albeit using different means. Swansea were often more ponderous in possession, but Swansea's players were almost totally Premiership novices. As Who Scored wrote soon after the news broke, only Barca (88.5%), Bayern (86.3%), and Manchester City (85.9%) had a better pass success rate in the top 5 leagues this season than Swansea's 85.7%.

It's self-serving to link my own earlier work, but the frustration over how Rodgers' Swansea stifled Liverpool in both meetings still oozes from the screen. And Liverpool weren't the only side to succumb to Swansea in such disheartening manner.

“My template for everything is organisation. With the ball you have to know the movement patterns, the rotation, the fluidity and positioning of the team. Then there’s our defensive organisation. So if it is not going well we have a default mechanism which makes us hard to beat and we can pass our way into the game again. Rest with the ball. Then we’ll build again."

And there's the Mourinho heritage. Organization, movement patterns, positioning. Not quite a rigid chessboard, but definable routines. I doubt it's coincidence that FSG refused Steve Clarke's resignation after Dalglish's sacking. Clarke worked with Rodgers under Mourinho, with Rodgers crediting Clarke for bringing him to Chelsea.

"I believe if you give a bad player time, he can play. If you give a good player time, he can kill you. So our emphasis is based around our positioning both with and without the ball. And for us, when we press well, we pass well."

Liverpool gave plenty of bad players time to kill them this season, whether by standing off in the final third or in refusing to press when the opposition reclaimed possession. Brendan Rodgers' sides rarely fail to do either.

"You work on zonal pressure, so that when it is in your zone, you have the capacity to press. That ability to press immediately, within five or six seconds to get the ball, is important. But you also have to understand when you can't and what the triggers are then to go for it again because you can't run about like a madman.

"It's decision-making and intelligence. And this was always the thing with the British player, they were always deemed never to be intelligent, not to have good decision-making skills but could fight like hell for the ball. I believe they have all of the [attributes] and, if you can structure that, then you can have real, effective results."

Liverpool also had a problem with a lack of intelligence from some of its British players, especially those acquired in the last 18 months, but the less said about that, the better. I suspect training, something that Rodgers takes full part in, will be an interesting place for the next few months. The Guardian interview, which is where that previous quote came from, is a priceless insight into how Rodgers sees and runs training sessions, and fits totally into the predominant belief that Liverpool are looking for a head coach rather than an all-consuming manager.

“When we have the football everybody’s a player. The difference with us is that when we have the ball we play with 11 men, other teams play with 10 and a goalkeeper.”

That should be music to Pepe Reina's ears. Reina's distribution (and overall form) suffered under both Hodgson and Dalglish, for various reasons. Liverpool's increasingly deep defense – whether Carragher started or not – almost assuredly hindered his talents. Returning to the 'sweeper-keeper' role he thrived in during Benitez's reign will hopefully see Reina's reclaim his place as one of the best goalkeepers in the league.

It's not incredibly difficult to see Rodgers' Swansea grafted onto Liverpool.



Short passes from the central defenders, building the attack from the back. Rodgers' Swansea never pressed as fervently as Barcelona, nor did the back four play as high a line – few, if any, do – but those are still predominant traits. Agger, Skrtel, Johnson, and Enrique should all do well in this system.

It'd be a fairly typical "runner, creator, destroyer" troika in central midfield, although the runner is usually the furthest-forward, with the two deeper central midfielders as deep-lying playmaker and holding tackler, although both midfielders need to have the ability to do both. Gerrard and Henderson can play as the most-advanced midfielder or both can play as the more-creative of the two deeper. Adam and Gower – Swansea's chance creation machine – could be similar in a deep-lying playmaker role, while Lucas is a vastly superior version of Leon Britton. As hinted at in the above formation diagram, after writing him off for the past two seasons, Aquilani could well find himself back in Liverpool's plans; a player who could star in Rodgers' system.

For Swansea, Sinclair cut inside from the left while Dyer or Routledge stretched play on the right. We could see a reversal of that with the disappointing Downing as an orthodox winger on the left and Suarez wreaking roaming havoc from the other side. The Uruguayan has played as a wide forward for both country and his previous club, and is capable of filling any forward role. Carroll is an archetypal English center-forward, better with the ball at his feet than he's given credit for, although he'd assuredly have to improve his movement and finishing to fit naturally into the system. But that's what training's for, right?

Yes, there are clear holes in Liverpool's version of this set-up, most notably in central midfield and up front. Which are obviously priority areas no matter the formation. There are clear holes in Liverpool's squad regardless of the set-up, as painfully proven during the duration of the previous campaign. I thought a 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 formation was the way forward last summer, and I still think similar now. But this is predominantly a conversation for another day. We've got all summer to fret about summer spending.

We still don't know the overall set-up of the club going forward. The Van Gaal (who was one of Mourinho's mentors) as Director of Football rumors seem to have slowly faded away, but whether that means Pep Segura and Rodolfo Borrell will split Technical Director duties with Ayre in charge of the purse-strings, whether Van Gaal's still in the frame, or whether Rodgers will have a closer-to-usual Premier League manager power over his domain remains to be seen. I suspect it'll be the former, but I won't pretend to have any inside insight either.

Regardless of the set-up, this appointment needs to be given time and backing. You can't overhaul the structure and appoint a young manager while expecting immediate results. Expectations were too high in each of the last three seasons, and Benitez, Hodgson, and Dalglish paid for it. Next season may well be painful. Maybe even as painful as the previous season was, although I both doubt it and certainly hope not. But unless we're forced to suffered through Hodgson-esque perpetual doom and gloom with absolutely no hope of improvement (or even an attempt at improvement), Rodgers will need license to fail before he can succeed.

Two weeks after Dalglish's exit, FSG seems to have gotten their man for their project. A young manager, more a head coach than club Godfather, who will develop alongside his increasingly younger squad. Even if we're unconvinced by or unhappy with the choice – which I'm not – this project needs to be given full patience for every chance at success.

What's The Formation, Kenneth? (Again)

I've seen some hand-wringing and questions as to how Liverpool were lined up yesterday, especially in the second half.



I tried to explain the set-up and the reasons for it in yesterday's match review, but pictures always make things easier. Not a 1000 words easier, but easier nonetheless.

Liverpool's first substitution obviously wasn't planned, and Spearing's exit restrained the away side more than they would have liked in the first 45 minutes when on top. But there was a clear strategy with the next two substitutions. The second half followed a simple narrative. Mancini made a change, Dalglish would respond. Mancini made another change, Dalglish parried a different way.

Adam Johnson was key to both sides' tactics, City's most dangerous play-maker with Silva absent, even after Nasri came on. Glen Johnson began on the left in response, an inverted full-back used to mute an inverted winger, evoking fond memories of Arbeloa on Messi four years earlier. When the Manchester City winger stopped playing down that flank early in the second half, shifting into the hole with Milner on the right and Nasri on the left, Enrique came on. Glen Johnson went central, as a left-sided center-back, partly to still keep an eye on Adam Johnson and partly to continue doubling up on Micah Richards' dangerous overlaps. When Dzeko and Kolarov entered, Johnson went to right back, tasking with keeping Nasri and Kolarov from getting crosses in for the target-man, while Carragher came on as defensive midfielder. Or, to go all in on the nomenclature game, as a libero: Carra Baresi, just as he's always fancied himself. Really, he came on to add another body in defense, because Liverpool certainly weren't looking to add anything to attack. Just to seal any possible cracks in the armor.

The most debate will probably be about the "second sub" formation: was Johnson a third center-back or a defensive midfielder? This sort of detail borders on semantics, splitting the finest of hairs, but I'll argue he was a center-back. Johnson stepped forward the few times Liverpool were in possession, but as soon as City entered the final third, Johnson was on the same line as Skrtel and Agger, defending like a center-back, making tackles in the penalty area, most notably on Agüero in the 68th. If Liverpool had more possession and Johnson was able to spend more time stepping forward, there's more an argument for calling him a midfielder. But Liverpool were almost always on the back foot. Yes, partly by design. And partly because Manchester City is still Manchester City.

Was it risky? Sure. Any time you invite pressure, you invite risks. Liverpool's defensive 1-0 win at Stamford Bridge last season was risky too, but Liverpool's five-man defense held on for the win after getting the goal. Any time you play a team as strong as Manchester City, especially on their ground, you have to take risks, no matter the key players they (and Liverpool) had absent.

Was it overly defensive? Nope. Because Liverpool won. There was no guarantee of a second Liverpool goal had the away side kept up the pressure seen the first 15 minutes. But there certainly would have been a greater danger of conceding an equalizer. City's two goals against United on Sunday, despite being down to ten, clearly loomed large in Dalglish and Clarke's minds, a reminder of what the league leaders are capable of when you give them space to operate, even at a man disadvantage. Preventing that from happening, keeping Liverpool's narrow edge for the second leg, was the only goal. And understandably so.

Trying to Find a Balance

"Balance" has been a word tossed around frequently as Liverpool tries to fine-tune its recently-acquired shape. Balance between attack and defense, balance between controlling the game and pushing the tempo, balance between direct football and pass and move football.

On Saturday, Glen Johnson started at right back for only the second time this season, for the first time with summer signing Jordan Henderson ahead of him on the right.

Liverpool have deployed a somewhat lopsided formation every time Henderson's started on the right, deeper than his counterpart on the opposite flank. Saturday's difference was that with Johnson, Liverpool were able to balance Henderson's proclivity to cut inside with an attack-focused fullback willing to stay wide and overlap.



Downing and Enrique, who have had a few more games to build an understanding, form a more orthodox pairing. Downing, a true winger, spends far more time in the opposition half, further forward, than Henderson. Enrique, therefore, spends more time coming inside, especially when in Liverpool's half, whether starting the attack or doubling up on an attacker with Downing less likely to track back than Henderson.



What's still best described as a 4-2-2-2 – two strikers, two central midfielders, and two "wide" players – easily becomes a lopsided 4-3-3 with how Henderson and Downing play their roles.



It's interesting to see Downing's average position so far forward, while Henderson's as much a part of a midfield three as a right-midfielder, especially given Adam's ability to pull wide to the left for deep crosses and diagonals. And at the same time, Lucas's holding position seems deeper than usual, almost like Busquets in front of Barcelona's center-backs, protecting the back line and ready to pull wide to cover where needed.

Simply by looking at the average position diagram, you could classify the formation as 2-3-2-3: Skrtel and Agger deepest, the full-backs and Lucas, Henderson and Adam linking defense and attack, and Downing, Carroll, Suarez up front. It's almost replicating the historic W-W formation from the 1930s. Which, incidentally, Jonathan Wilson wrote about in regards to Barcelona almost exactly a year ago. Not to compare an evolutionary, maturing Liverpool to Barca or team which won consecutive World Cups or anything.

With West Brom supremely lacking in ambition and with Thomas and Brunt on the wings – neither the trickiest opponent – both Johnson and Enrique were relatively untroubled in defense. The fullbacks attempted four tackles combined, three successful, through 90 minutes.

Against routine opposition, we got to see the Liverpool of the future, what Dalglish is seemingly building towards: a fluid, adaptable formation. If direct football, with long passes, runs at defenders and deep crosses, isn't working down the left, Johnson and Henderson make it possible for slower buildup with overlaps from the full-back on the right. Admittedly, most opponents will put up more of a struggle, will make Liverpool work far harder in both halves, and will put both Henderson and Downing under far more pressure, requiring each to contribute more in defense.

But against mid-table opposition and lower, both home and away, this is seemingly the template to be followed. Saturday's match against West Brom, with Johnson back and with Henderson having his best game so far for Liverpool, was the first conclusive demonstration that it could actually work.

On Charlie Adam

The never-ending story finally has its conclusion. Our long international nightmare is over, and Charlie Adam will sign for Liverpool after completing his 17th medical (rough estimate). Danny Wilson and Jonjo Shelvey continue to be mentioned as possible makeweights on loan, but that hasn't been confirmed.

Adam and Blackpool were a football purist's dream last season: eminently watchable and frequently magical. That the club was relegated on the last day is further proof that life is not fair (also, that defending is kind of important). Yet I'm still warier of Liverpool spending £8-10m on Adam than £16m on Henderson.

Adding both Adam and Henderson to a side with Gerrard, Meireles, Lucas, Shelvey, and Spearing (and, technically, Aquilani and Poulsen) seems overkill. That Liverpool's are shallower than a Pygmy kiddie pool is no great secret, and added depth is necessary all over the pitch. But I still wonder how Adam fits, even with Liverpool likely to divest at least two central midfielders (Poulsen sold, Shelvey loaned, Aquilani still doesn't count). It's not as if the CMs on their way out played key roles; combined, Shelvey and Poulsen saw 1082 minutes of Premiership action. And we're not even conceding the remote, inconceivable, illogical possibility that Meireles might be sold.

The bigger fear, however, is that Adam will prove another single season flash in a the pan, a big fish when the pond isn't much bigger than a puddle. Adam thrived at Blackpool because Blackpool built its attack around his strengths while trying to minimize his faults. Vaughan and Southern/Grandin/Phillips carried countless gallons of water while Adam sprayed nanometer-perfect passes from his sedan chair in the center circle. Adam monopolized every free kick, penalty, and corner, which seems slightly less likely with High Priest Steven Gerrard involved. 10 of Adam's 12 goals (seven penalties, two free kicks, one corner) and five of his nine assists (four corners, one free kick) came from set plays. Adam didn't defend, but he didn't have to; Blackpool doesn't defend either.

Those set pieces sure were magical though. Like when he scored directly from a corner. Or when he embarrassed van der Sar with this swirling free kick. Or this free kick, a sumptuously floated assist. Or either of these corners.

Adam's also got a cross in him when popping up out wide. And he's not too bad on the break either: cleverly scoring and assisting on the counter this year. Noel dutifully analyzed Adam's weaknesses a couple of weeks ago, while Tangerine Dreaming wrote an outstanding firsthand dissection, but it's easy to see from the above highlights how those qualities could mesh with Liverpool's current capabilities.

I've been playing with potential formations since the previous season ended. One of the hazards of having not football to watch, I guess. And I'm still not sure what "base" formation Liverpool will prefer come August, although I have a suspicion.



I've included the oft-discussed potential signing of Stewart Downing in these diagrams, albeit in parentheses. Initially, Wickham was also mentioned; that's how long ago this post was drafted in anticipation of Adam's signing. Wickham's moot now, although Liverpool still seem likely to sign a young-ish striker if Ngog is finally sold. But the sale of Downing feels like a matter of time, no matter news of Villa recently rejecting Liverpool's latest bid.

That the first finished summer business was signing two central midfielders leads to an assumption that 4-3-3 is most likely deployment, with six midfielders for three spots and a front line containing some combination of Carroll, Suarez, Kuyt, and one or two new signings. The formation easily becomes 4-2-3-1 if Meireles, Adam, or Gerrard pushes forward, with the two other midfielders holding. But given Dalglish's preference for 4-2-2-2 last campaign (which Joel Radaj analyzed brilliantly for Liverpool Offside), that formation is also possibility.

In a 4-2-2-2 with these players, the lineup would be more malleable. Any central midfield pairing seems possible: Gerrard and Lucas, Lucas and Adam, Gerrard and Henderson, etc. Adam and Gerrard seems a frighteningly defense-free duo, while I worry that any midfield without Lucas or Spearing would be prone to attacks through the center, but that doesn't seem to concern the club considering its supposed transfer targets. In this formation, both Meireles, Henderson, and Kuyt could play as attacking midfielders (along with any new signings and/or Maxi) instead of in central midfield or up front respectively.

Liverpool needs more left-footers. Liverpool could certainly use a left foot capable of Adam's passes, Adam certainly is fun to watch, and £8-10m certainly isn't the end of the world. I should wait until the summer's business is finished before passing judgment, but there appear to be at least two or three bigger holes in the squad than another central midfielder. As a former manager might have put it, I'm most afraid it's another lamp at the expense of a coffee table.

What's the Formation, Kenneth?

Yesterday, I remarked that Liverpool apparently used the third different formation in three matches despite starting the same front six in all three. What do the Daily Telegraph's average position charts (click on "team stats" on the right sidebar) have to say?



It's difficult to divine the 4-4-2 diamond from the average position diagram against Birmingham. Kuyt and Meireles occupy almost the same location, despite the fact Kuyt seemingly played as a striker, dropping deep receive the ball, while Meireles linked midfield and attack. Spearing is ahead of and to the right of Lucas, while similar goes for Maxi on the left, who's slightly narrower than in the other two matches.

The image below shows the run-up to Liverpool's second. Meireles is tucked in behind the strikers, with Spearing and Maxi on either side and Kuyt and Suarez ahead, ready for the flick-on. Lucas, at the base of the diamond, is out of the picture, protecting the defense only slightly ahead of Carragher and Skrtel.



Against Newcastle, the average position diagram clearly shows more of a 4-2-2-2 formation. Spearing and Lucas are on the same line, Meireles is deeper and wider, and Kuyt is closer to Suarez. As Johnson and Flanagan switched flanks at halftime, neither appears in their "normal" position; Flanagan is next to Lucas while Johnson's circle is hidden by Spearing.

The quick counter-attack for Liverpool's first, bursting from defense, demonstrates this formation. Kuyt and Suarez, each trying to find space, are ahead of the midfield line of four. As the attack progresses, Meireles and Maxi continue ahead of the "holding midfielders"; Maxi eventually takes up a position in space at the back post, in the right place for Williamson's poor clearance.



At Fulham, Liverpool's average position looks similar to that against Birmingham. But it clearly wasn't a 4-4-2 diamond when watching the match. If compelled to make a notation just from the diagram, it looks almost as much a lopsided 4-3-2-1 as 4-2-3-1. Or you could call it 4-5-1. Or 4-3-3. I obviously think I'm right, and it's worth differentiating from the other two matches, but herein lies the flaws of forcing football onto paper.

To again use a singular moment to demonstrate a 90-minute-long match, below shows Liverpool right before the opener, with a deeper Lucas and Spearing poised to launch a quick attack. Suarez is already out of the picture, bursting down the left channel to beat the offside trap, but Maxi, Meireles, and Kuyt form a clear line of three along the halfway line.



Of course, if I looked hard enough, we could probably show different formations from different sequences. Formational notation foibles aside, this flexibility has served Liverpool incredibly well of late. Birmingham, Newcastle, and Fulham may not have been the most daunting of opponents, but two of those three have been painful thorns in Liverpool's side in recent years, while Liverpool failed to beat both Newcastle and Birmingham under Hodgson (spectacularly failed, in the case of Newcastle).

Opposition teams have no clue who's going to pop up in the penalty area, and are infinitely scared of Suarez wherever he may be, permanently on the back foot because of his ability with the ball. Different midfielders have gone through spells of blazing-hot form: first Meireles, scoring five in six during January and February, then Maxi, with seven goals in his last three games. Kuyt's scoring like it's going out of style, tallying nine starting with his hat-trick against the Mancs and notching in each of the last five games. Johnson's return has added much-needed width to the side, creating two assists yesterday.

It'll be interesting to see if Liverpool remains this flexible come next season. Gerrard and Carroll, among others, will return to the starting XI, while Liverpool will be in the market for a left-sided winger/forward at the very least. However, for once, it's nice to live in the moment. I still can't believe I'll be sad to see this season end.

Stoke Chalkboard Review: A Tale of Four Partnerships

Liverpool's tactical chess against Stoke, well-analyzed by Noel from Liverpool Offside, worked a treat yesterday. Best described as a 3-4-2-1, it was interesting to see the roles played by each in the new formation.

What caught my eye in the chalkboards was how roles overlapped and fit together, increasing the side's overall cohesion. Both Agger and Skrtel played as supplementary center-backs, bordering on orthodox fullbacks. Kelly and Johnson were up and down the pitch as wingbacks. Lucas and Aurelio formed the base of the central midfield square, while Gerrard and Meireles each fluidly roamed in a free role.






Most notable was how Agger and Skrtel supplemented the attack with Stoke pinned back. Both chalkboards look more like orthodox, deep lying fullbacks rather than center-backs. With Kyrgiakos man-marking Carew into invisibility, Agger and Skrtel both had license to get forward. That's a major part of Agger's game, but one hilarious moment saw Skrtel charging towards goal a la Mark Lawrenson, beating defenders before striking a pitiful shot wide.

But Liverpool prospered in each section. Gerrard was everywhere in a familiar free role. Lucas steadily ran the show, with an 89% completion rate against pressing, physical Stoke. Liverpool could have done with more end product from both wingbacks – Kelly looked more comfortable on his preferred side, only to have crosses routinely fail to find heads – but each worked diligently to give Liverpool real width.

The greatest compliment I can bestow is that Liverpool looked wholly comfortable in this unfamiliar system. Benitez infrequently threw tactical curve balls, such as the 3-4-3 in an 0-1 loss to Sunderland and the 3-4-2-1 which beat Portsmouth 3-2 in 2009. But in those matches, whether win or loss, it took time for Liverpool to come to grip with the changes. Yesterday, the team looked like they'd be doing this all season, taking 30 minutes to adapt and duly threaten Stoke. That's a credit to Dalglish and assistant manager Steve Clarke. As is the fact that Liverpool have kept three successive clean sheets for the first time all season.

A couple more notes of interest:

• While it doesn't fit with the overall theme of "partnerships," Reina's passing rate needs to be highlighted

35 of 39 – 90% – is an incredibly high completion rate for a goalkeeper. And it's not as if all were short passes out to a defender. Out of 11 attempts over the halfway line, Reina completed seven, which is a credit to Kuyt's play as the lone striker. Against Fulham, he completed 16 out of 24. Against Wolves, 14 out of 35. Just a wonderful display from a keeper who's already superlative when distributing the ball. And to think we were worried when his passing rate plummeted under Hodgson and Mike Kelly.

• Following the Wolves match, I wrote about the decreasing number of passes since Dalglish took the reins. Last night put paid to that notion. Liverpool attempted 578 passes, completing 449 – a 78% rate. Compare that to 379 attempted at Wolves, 434 attempted against Everton, and 517 against Blackpool. The number of passes rose against Fulham – to a similar 459 completed out of 574 – but Liverpool were far more effective yesterday, evident in both the style of play and score line.

• Glen Johnson attempted the fewest passes of any Liverpool starter with 36. Only one Stoke player – fullback Andy Wilkinson, with 43 – attempted more than Johnson. The midfielder with the most completed passes was Pennant, with 22, the same number of passes Liverpool's deepest center-back completed. It's not hyperbolic to suggest Liverpool passed Stoke into submission.

Welcome back, Liverpool.

Crazy Money and Andy Carroll

Two in, two out. We'd known about Babel exit's and Suarez's signing but today saw Torres push his way out and Andy Carroll joining for a rumored £35m. In addition, Liverpool weren't able to pry Charlie Adam from Blackpool. Combined, the outlay on Suarez and Carroll almost exactly equals what was recouped from selling Torres and Babel. Yet another window where Liverpool fails to spend significantly, I guess...

Had you told me at the beginning of the window that Liverpool would end January having replaced Torres and Babel with Suarez and Carroll, I'm not sure how I would have reacted. With time to come to terms with Torres' mercenary exit – which merited its own post – I'm happy with what Liverpool's recouped, even if they had to pay far over the odds to do so. Adding Adam to the mix would have made the day complete.

Liverpool were forced into steep prices by Torres' late demand. Carroll's price comes as the largest surprise – only seven players have cost more: the aforementioned Torres, C Ronaldo, Ibrahimovic, Kaka, Zidane, Figo, and Crespo. But you pay a premium for strikers. You pay a premium for youth. You pay a premium for a British passport. And you pay a premium in January, especially on the last day of the window.

At 22, Carroll represents both a leap of faith and investment in the future. He's about the same age as Torres, Alonso, Mascherano, and Reina were when they signed, and the first three on that list help demonstrate the resale value of a player at that age. If Carroll progresses and Liverpool were somehow forced to sell, they recoup their crazy money. If FSG are willing to pay, so be it. While £35m doesn't fit with "Moneyball ethics" on face value, that money's might be better spent in January before the UEFA Financial Fair Play requirements kick in over the summer. Plus, Liverpool needed a replacement now. The last time Kenny Dalglish broke the British record for a Geordie – Beardsley for £1.9m in 1987 – it turned out alright.

Right now, Liverpool isn't geared towards an aerially dominant striker. Gerrard, Johnson and Aurelio are good crossers, while Maxi and Kuyt have their moments, but Liverpool's best football over the last six years has come when keeping it on the floor. Buying Carroll is a deal that Roy Hodgson would love to have done: a gargantuan striker used to having long balls lumped in his direction. Carroll is more than an ox, with the clichéd good touch for a big man, but he brings talents Liverpool haven't often had.

Assuming Dalglish continues with the 4-3-3, Liverpool's best XI is probably:

Reina
Kelly Carragher Agger Johnson
Gerrard Lucas Meireles
Kuyt Carroll Suarez

That could be a frightening team. Bringing in Adam would have allowed Gerrard to be pushed forward, adding a better passer to the mix, but the above's still a tantalizing prospect. The summer's business will assuredly center on buying a winger.

Not that grand dramatic gestures are required, but today's a statement of intent from FSG. It's ambitious and almost reactionary from a group that's been exceptionally deliberative so far.

Liverpool v Sunderland – Average Position Comparison

Normally, Soccernet's graphics are infuriating, often incorrect or unhelpful. But comparing the average position of Liverpool's starting XI in Saturday's match to last March's 3-0 win is a perfect encapsulation of the tactical differences between last season's team and the current version.



Click on the image to see it full-size, where the player numbers are actually legible. The underlined players are the outfield starters.

That graphic can be summed up in two words: deeper and narrower.

It's especially evident in the positions of the back four and the "wingers." The center backs are slightly further back; the difference explained by Agger and Skrtel's style of play. The fullbacks are massively further back; last March, both Johnson and Insua spent more time in the opposition half than their own. Cole and Kuyt – ostensibly the wide-men in Saturday's formation – are nowhere near the touchline, compared to Babel and Maxi last year, where I wrote that Liverpool's formation could have been written as 4-2-4, and where the wingers were actually supplemented by attacking fullbacks, especially on the right flank. And yes, Benitez actually used a 4-4-2 in that 3-0 win last March.

Comparing the holding midfielders, Poulsen's basically atop Skrtel as a third center-back, whereas Mascherano's position is close to where Gerrard was on Saturday. Torres is almost 20 yards deeper, just outside the center circle, needing to retreat in an attempt to link with the midfield. Last season, Liverpool had seven starters who spent more time in the Sunderland's half of the field. This season, Liverpool had four. Barely.

All in all, it makes for depressing viewing and confirms lingering suspicions. Hodgson's happier with a deeper defensive line and keeping a narrow, compact shape. Saturday's match was the worst example, but the graphics from the other five matches aren't very different (here's the fixture list; you can go from there to check if you're so inclined). Despite complaints over the previous manager's conservative strategy, these are far more defensive tactics. And so far, it simply hasn't worked in the league. Liverpool's had a very tough stretch of matches to start the season, but six points from six matches is unacceptable, no matter the opposition or off-field problems.

Why Were Liverpool So Bad Yesterday?

Unsurprisingly, there are innumerable facets of Liverpool's match yesterday that could be criticized. Torres' disjointed performance seems the most repeated talking point this morning, evidently because Jamie Redknapp said so. As if he's some paragon of knowledge. But how many times does the Spaniard have to pull Liverpool back from the brink by himself? And how many times has he done it in the past?

The midfield pairing was another, with marginally more basis in fact. But it's still a somewhat facile argument. It doesn't explain why the attacking players performed so bad, because how the attack performs isn't Lucas and Poulsen's brief. Lucas and Poulsen were Lucas and Poulsen yesterday. Exactly as advertised, if a little sloppier than usual from the Brazilian. Their job was to sit and hold, and both sat and held. Apologies in advance, but this post will be heavy on images from The Guardian's chalkboards: one, because they're one of the best visual uses of statistics and two, because Soccernet's diagrams for this match – especially the average position and heat map – were especially terrible. I'm fully aware these graphics aren't the end-all, be-all of analysis – and all of them focus on passing statistics – but they help illustrate the point.




As said, slightly sloppier than usual from Lucas – I remember those three of those four misplaced passes, and at least two of them led to Birmingham counters. But, as usual, neither were especially wasteful and neither were adventurous in the slightest. And while the pairing obviously hindered the attack, as (sadly) expected, it wasn't the main reason Liverpool failed to score.

That's down to two other facets: Birmingham's increasing willingness to pack the box when Liverpool got a few bodies forward, and the complete and utter inability to create a telling final ball.



I wasn't too upset with Jovanovic's contribution when watching the match, but, in my defense, I also don't expect miracles from him either: a new player, one who's a left-sided forward, not an out-and-out winger. Evidently my lying eyes deceived me. Because that graphic demonstrates the unmitigated disaster in the final third. Liverpool had the ball in some decent positions – and actually won the possession battle 56-44% despite being away from Anfield (according to Soccernet and Sky Sports, but not the BBC for some reason) – but could do absolutely nothing from them.

At the same time, I don't know if Gerrard simply had an off day, wishes he was back in central midfield, cannot play up front with Torres in Hodgson's system, or suffered because of Torres' struggles, but the pairing just did not work yesterday. And while Liverpool looked better after Meireles came on – again, no surprise given how unattacking the Lucas/Poulsen pairing is – Gerrard wasn't much more influential. But at least there were two "midfielders" looking to get forward – whether we're classifying Gerrard or Meireles as a support striker is incidental – although Liverpool were the only team trying to win the game at that point in the match.



Maxi Rodriguez, who I singled out in my match review, wasn't anywhere near as wasteful in the final third, but that's because he didn't even attempt the sort of passes Gerrard and Jovanovic tried.



One pass – one – went into the area. Two more went to the edge of the area. Otherwise, that's a graphic worthy of a right-sided central midfielder – as he was for Argentina at the World Cup – or right back. So much for providing more natural wing play than Kuyt.

Long story short, the attack was as woeful as possible yesterday, and it's been woeful almost all season long. I hate feeling like I'm throwing Hodgson under the bus before he's even fully unpacked – we simply have to support the manager, especially so soon into the season – but it's been a horrifying trend in almost every single game so far. And I've also included this or a similar disclaimer in far too many recent posts.

Hopefully, having Cole back from suspension and Meireles in the team will help remedy the situation, because the front four Liverpool played yesterday could hardly have been worse. I honestly don't know what remedies to suggest as far as different players, as it seems that the tactics are the issue. Would Babel or Pacheco, for argument's sake, really made that much of a difference given what we know about the two and how everyone else played yesterday? Liverpool, for right or wrong, are more focused on defending deep and keeping the shape, as Fulham were last season. Whether that changes as Cole and Meireles come in and as Hodgson settles remains to be seen.

Is possession still nine-tenths of the law?

The thing that's the hardest for me to wrap my mind around when watching Roy Hodgson's team compared to the side we saw for the last six seasons is how much less possession Liverpool's had so far. Watching a promoted West Brom dictate the play for long stretches at Anfield, with Liverpool only winning the possession battle 51-49% thanks to an improved second half (having less of the ball than Albion in the first), hammered the point home.

Keeping the ball was rarely a problem under Benitez. Even in terrible losses last season, with the team either comprehensively beaten (say, at Fiorentina) or unlucky as sin (at Sunderland), Liverpool almost always had the edge in possession. Going through all of last season's results was painful enough, but if memory serves, we'd probably see similar statistics in the previous five campaigns.

Seven games is an incredibly small sample size (and two of the seven were against what was basically part-time opposition), but through those seven, Liverpool's only had the edge in possession four times: twice against Rabotnicki, at home against Trabzonspor, and yesterday's narrow win. So far, Liverpool's averaged 50.9% of the possession this season. Last season – where we all can agree that Benitez's team was beyond woeful in a more than a few matches – Liverpool averaged 57.3%.

Out of the 56 games in 2009-10, Liverpool had less possession than its opponents ten times: at Chelsea, against United, at Arsenal in the Carling Cup, against Tottenham, against Everton (down to 10 men), at Lille, against Lille, at United, at Benfica (down to 10 men), and at Atletico. Liverpool won four of those matches and lost six. The four wins came at home, the six losses on the road. Surprise, surprise; Liverpool had an absolutely terrible record away from Anfield regardless of who had more of the ball.

I'm certainly not saying possession is the end-all, be-all of football, as demonstrated by last year's win-loss record. Liverpool dropped points in a lot of games where they had more of the ball. Clearly, it's what you do with the ball that counts. But the amount of possession the team's had so far this season is markedly different (and at times, frighteningly low) compared to what we saw under Rafa, and, again, it takes some getting used to.

I'm also not saying it can't work, as Inter proved against Barcelona in the Champions League or Switzerland proved against Spain in the World Cup. Or as Fulham proved in last season's Europa League. But it's a lot harder to score if you don't have the ball, and the Spanish tiki-taka style is the one currently in vogue, both because of its aesthetics and Spain and Barcelona's recent successes. The modern game's seemingly becoming more and more about ball retention, and Liverpool's gone backwards in this regard so far.

If Liverpool continues in this vein, the team would have to be very good on the counter attack and resilient in defense. Again, that sounds an awful lot like Hodgson's Fulham – can't teach an old dog new tricks, a tiger doesn't change its stripes, etc. Managers have their own beliefs and tendencies, and they usually change their teams more than their teams change them.

But Torres, a striker able to conjure something from absolutely nothing, would be indescribably important – even more so than in the past few seasons. It also necessitates utilizing the entire field – especially the flanks, where Liverpool's struggled for years (Hodgson frequently used inverted wingers at Fulham) – and having midfielders who can quickly open up space with movement or long balls. There were a lot of complaints about the Lucas/Poulsen pairing in the last two matches, and on the surface, it appears the pairing will struggle with this style of play.

I'll continue to argue Lucas is underrated (and can play the pass-and-move game when the shackles come off; see his goal against Benfica, for one) and Poulsen needs time to settle, but questions will persist about both. While one "destroyer" will be needed to add steel to the back-line – and either can play that role, although I'd assume Hodgson is more comfortable with Poulsen given his history with the player – I doubt we'll see both on the field much going forward, especially with the addition of Meireles – a midfielder who fits into the dynamic pass-and-move mold. The simple "ticking-over" that Lucas provides, which aligned with Benitez's tactics, seems far less important if Liverpool continues with what we've seen so far this season.

I know we're barely into Hodgson's tenure, and it's hard to draw any conclusions when the manager's still assembling his preferred squad. But it's still incredibly strange to see Liverpool struggle to have and hold the ball. And, like when any new manager comes in, patience is required. It'll take time for the tactics to work, especially when the majority of players are accustomed to the controlling the tempo and steadily building attacks.

¿Cuatro-Uno-Tres-Dos o Cuatro-Dos-Tres-Uno?

International friendlies frequently don't mean much, especially when the team's rusty in its first match for a few months, so don't look too hard at Spain's late 3-2 win against unheralded Saudi Arabia. At least they didn't do as badly as Serbia, Portugal, or the US (prior to today, at least). They can't all be 3-1 wins over Mexico.

What's more significant is how the team lined up, and how potential starters played when given the chance. Which is why I was interested to see Spain's 4-2-3-1 in the absence of Torres.

Spain's usual formation – at least the one they won Euro 2008 (and lost to the Americans in the Confederations Cup) with – is 4-1-3-2, with either Alonso or Senna holding, a playmaking line of three led by Xavi, and two of the world’s best strikers in Torres and Villa. Yet I'm still not sure it's their best team.

It was strange to hear today's match commentator say that Torres' injury makes Del Bosque's life easier, but it's true. When El Niño's out, Spain simply has to play two deep-lying midfielders, leaving Villa as a lone striker. Today's line-up was:

Casillas
Ramos Pique Puyol Arbeloa
Busquets Alonso
Silva Xavi Iniesta
Villa

Despite starting slowly and conceding two sloppy goals, it was a line-up that worked. Again, there are different standards for "worked" in friendlies. Villa scored, Xavi was the pivot, Iniesta appears near top form, Alonso notched from distance, and there was yet another late winner. Had Casillas not flapped at an early corner, and had Spain not gone to sleep after taking the lead and making four substitutions (or had the strike not deflected off Al Numare), we'd be talking about a thorough if somewhat uninspired victory.

It was different when Senna was the primary defensive midfielder. A beast of a tackler as well a clever passer, Senna could hold the fort on his own: a one-man shield while the front five attacked at will. He wasn't named it, but I thought he was Spain's best player at Euro 08. As much as I love Xabi Alonso – and this season's done little to diminish that love – he doesn't fill the role in the same way.

Aside from '04-05, when Benitez stuck with the 4-4-2 left over from Houllier's reign, Alonso was paired with a "tackler" at Liverpool. First Sissoko, with Gerrard moving out right, then Mascherano as Liverpool transitioned to 4-2-3-1. We can argue the merits of Rafa's conservatism another time, but that Benitez didn't trust him defensively speaks volumes. I may be underrating Alonso as a tackler, but he's clearly better when hunting in tandem with another.

And I've gone through this tactical charade without mentioning Cesc. A candidate to start when fit, whether in place of Alonso or Silva, he's another dynamic midfielder who doesn't offer much protection. It was Busquets paired with Alonso today, and individually, he was mediocre at best. Senna must have been pretty average this season to be left out for Sergio. But he adds a different, and arguably crucial dimension to the Spanish XI, and I'll fervently argue that while Busquets certainly didn't impress, he made Alonso look very good.

Spain's almost always chosen the more attacking option, a philosophical choice if not cultural. It's the way football's played – or should be. In a group with Switzerland, Honduras, and Chile, it shouldn't matter much. But if they face the likes of Brazil, Argentina, or even England later on, conservatism might be the smarter option. Even with the likes of Torres and Villa in your team.

Liverpool's Strongest XI

I was such a big fan of the 4-2-3-1 with Gerrard as a second striker/in a free role because it seemed to get the best of out Gerrard and Torres. That and it led to Liverpool nearly winning the league. But after how this season's gone, we rightfully have to wonder if that's consistently possible without Alonso.

The idea appeared to be that, while not a direct replacement, Aquilani would play in a 'similar' position to Alonso in the 4-2-3-1 when fit. Maybe he just hasn't been fit until recently, but I think he's shone in the "Gerrard role," whether it's been Torres, Kuyt, Ngog, or Babel up top (obviously to varying degrees of success based on the striker).

Rafa's been reluctant to play Aquilani deeper in midfield, even after he received a clean bill of health, and especially in "tough" matches. He didn't impress in the position against Fiorentina in December or Reading in January, and was left on the bench throughout the winter. But we started to see the change when Liverpool faced Spurs at the end of January, winning 2-0, with the first goal set up because Aquilani was further up the pitch.

But he's been increasingly pushed further forward, and he's looked increasingly dangerous in the position, especially against Atletico, Burnley, and Portsmouth, tallying 2 goals and 4 assists in those two games. With only seven starts and nine substitute appearances in the league, he has Liverpool's second-highest Premiership assist total with six. Only Gerrard has more – seven – with Insua, Benayoun, and Johnson on five. But for all his clever, close passing, sometimes it doesn't come off, and potentially goal-conceding giveaways tend to concede less goals when the ball's given away higher up the pitch.

That leads to the contentious Gerrard in central midfield debate. Is it his best position or not? Benitez seemed happiest with second striker, Capello plays him on the left for England. Still, there a few sights more pleasing to Liverpool fans than trademark Gerrard lung-busters and blasts from deep. Like when he played on the right in '05-06, what's best for the team and what's best for Gerrard might not necessarily be harmonious.

There's space for Lucas in this formation whether he's partnering Mascherano or Gerrard. He's been too much of a scapegoat as it is this season, which is why his two fantastic assists in the last two games have been welcomed. And he's shown more in both attack and defense as the season's gone on. But with Gerrard, Mascherano, and Aquilani on form, he's the odd man out, unless, of course, Mascherano's forced into right back.

Maxi, Benayoun, and Babel have all looked better of late with Aquilani in a more advanced position. His quick passing allows those smaller, clever players to dice through a rigid defense, leading to goals like Maxi's against Burnley and Aquilani's yesterday. Torres and Babel also linked up excellently against the likes of Lille, Pompey, and Sunderland before El Niño was ruled out for the rest of the season.

Kuyt/Maxi on the right and Babel/Benayoun on the left are still a lot stronger than most teams' flanks. But that Babel and Benayoun are primarily right-footed still leads me to believe that left wing is the most important upgrade needed over the summer – yes, that drum again – although I'm well aware that left-back and another striker are fairly key as well.

However, the above still looks like a fairly strong side to me, no matter this season's results. Which makes me wonder why Benitez (and Torres, and Gerrard) are talking about 'four or five' new players when all three know how tight money is. A winger, a back-up striker, and a left-back, in addition to continuing promising youngsters like Shelvey and Sterling, is what my shopping list would entail, even in the best of circumstances.

Last night aptly demonstrated Liverpool's squad isn't deep enough, but you have to remember how many players were missing: Torres, Skrtel, Insua, Aurelio, Kelly, Ngog, and Riera. That's a full bench, and even a couple of those players would have helped Liverpool's lack of depth last night. Plus, the likes of Pacheco, Shelvey, and possibly Nemeth and others, might be ready to make the leap into the first team.

Maybe my questionable optimism is misplaced. Chances are I think this squad is better than it actually is. And I'm well aware how bad this season's been. But are Liverpool really that far away? You're telling me the line-up at the top of the page couldn't challenge for the league with one or two more signings and a far better injury record?

I don't understand this game sometimes.

(FYI: Preview for Sunday's match v Chelsea will be late tonight or early tomorrow.)

The Metamorphosis of Ryan Babel

I’m sorry, Ryan Babel.

I took a bit of steam out of this post in the comments of yesterday’s match review, but it’s a point worth reiterating. Not because it’s yet another example of how wrong I can be, but because the difference Babel’s made of late has been a near revelation. At the very least, he’s shedding the ‘do not open until the 70th minute’ label and impressing in starts.

I’ll begin by quoting what I wrote yesterday, a succinct summation of the subsequent 1000 words:

I need to apologize to Ryan Babel, who deserves a lot of credit for recent games. But I don't take back what I wrote pre-January.

The difference is in Babel's game, and I'm hopeful (and believe) that it's down to his discussions with Benitez during the transfer window.

Babel's been Babel in attack, if more consistent when starting. But the key - the reason he's been playing games - is that he's learned how to track back. It was even evident today. Sunderland offered next to nothing, but Babel always got back to defend, even taking up positions behind Insua when Sunderland's fullbacks rarely overlapped.

I cannot overemphasize how important that is. Important to Liverpool, and important to Babel's career.

I'm not much for turning points, especially this season, but this seemingly has been one. And maybe it'll help dispel the illusion of Rafa's poor man-management.

Babel’s started in six of the last nine games: 3-0 Sunderland, 3-0 Lille, 4-1 Pompey, 0-1 Lille, 3-1 Unirea, and 0-0 City, with City on 2/21 his first start since facing (and being injured against) the same side in November. A result is rarely down to one player, but four wins, a draw, and a loss certainly isn’t a bad record, with goals against Pompey and Unirea and an assist against Lille.

But as said above, more impressive has been the overall performance put in. Thanks to the wonders of technology, I’ve a couple of graphics that illustrate this point. Both compare yesterday’s match to the first of the season, a 1-2 loss at Spurs, where Babel surprisingly started (one of his three league starts prior to this recent run).




First, the Guardian’s Chalkboard, which show the passes Babel attempted in each game, demonstrating the positions he took up, what he looked to accomplish, and how successful he was.

The second is his Soccernet “heat map” for each match – Sunderland on the top and Spurs below. Yes, Babel had 25 more minutes in yesterday’s match, substituted in the 68th against Spurs, but look at how he utilizes more of the flank against Sunderland, including in his own half, despite Liverpool’s relative comfort.

For all the praise, Babel wasn’t the ne plus ultra yesterday, and probably was the third or fourth best player in the team at most. For all his good work, the final ball – whether it was a shot or cross – was often lacking, partly evidenced in the above Chalkboard. It’s a complaint that’s cropped up before. But it should be easier to add to his game than defense awareness; it's something that will come with playing time. And with Liverpool likely to keep it tight in Portugal this Thursday, I’m interested to see if Babel retains his place. It’ll help demonstrate if he’s truly back in plans or if I’m imagining things.

It’s a small sample size, but Insua’s also been better with Babel in front of him than Benayoun or Maxi this season (he and Riera linked up well early on, but we all know what happened to Albert). In the same vein as this post last year, Liverpool’s record is 3W-1D-6L with Benayoun/Insua, 1-1-2 with Maxi/Insua, 6-3-1 with Riera/Insua, and 4-1-3 with Babel/Insua. And two of those Babel/Insua losses came back in the fall, the aforementioned Spurs match and Arsenal in the Carling Cup. As of late, Babel’s “protected” Insua far, far better than Benayoun or Maxi.

Since Babel’s “reclaimed” a starting spot on the left, none of the goals conceded have started down that flank. Hazard scored a tremendous free kick from Liverpool’s right. Belhadj’s cross for Pompey’s consolation came from that side as well. Unirea’s lone goal was from a corner, and while it was a header over a static Insua, the move didn’t come down that wing.

Another boon has been how well Torres and Babel have linked up, although Torres can make anyone look good with the form he’s in. Both players like to cut in from the left onto their right (evidenced by Torres’ superlative first goal on Sunday, and watch Babel’s run on the replay), making it dangerous when the two play together, dragging defenders into uncomfortable positions and generally creating confusion. That’s a big weapon to have in the armory, and it’s one that wouldn’t work to the same effect if Babel played in his “preferred position” paired with Torres up top. Which necessitated him showing enough defensive aptitude and work ethic for Benitez to trust him with a midfield berth.

Yes, Babel’s chances were few and far between over the past year or so; inadvisable quotes in the media, a month-long injury, and a few frustrating and anonymous appearances somewhat led to that, which led me to believe the player was on his way out. There had to be a reason Benitez wasn’t using him – and it’s not a personal grudge – which is why I’ve focused on what he’s apparently added to his game.

I still think that Liverpool could do with improvement on the flanks. I’ve been beating that drum for well over a year now and a few good matches from Babel aren’t going to completely change that. But I’ve become far more convinced that he has a future at the club, through his own hard work once given the chance.

Well done. Keep it up.

Kuyt or Maxi, Babel or Benayoun

In lieu of more macro-level wrist-slitting about the club and manager's prospects, I'd rather investigate one of the tactical areas that irritated me yesterday (yeah, there were more than just this, but I'd rather write about the wingers than the fullbacks or Gerrard).

For the fourth straight game against 'top-level' opposition, Maxi's started on the left. Admittedly, I didn't see a ton of him at Atletico or for Argentina, but when I have, he's been deployed on the right every time.

Maxi on the left: 1-2 United (a); 0-0 City (a); 0-1 Arsenal (a); 1-0 Everton (h)
Maxi on the right: 4-1 Pompey (h); 0-1 Wigan (a); 2-1 Blackburn (h); 0-0 Wolves (a)

If Maxi starting on the left when either Babel or Benayoun (or both) has been available isn't the perfect demonstration of Benitez's conservatism, I don't know what is. It's ostensibly "worked" in two of those matches, Everton and City (as both sides were clearly content with a draw at the Eastlands), and Liverpool could have eked at least a point out of United or Arsenal if other things went differently, but I can't remember Maxi making much impact in any of the four.

Despite Liverpool's record when Maxi's started on the right, that's where he's done the most, and it's led to Liverpool at least looking cohesive going forward. He was excellent against Pompey and good against Blackburn. The entire team was dire in the two losses, and Maxi's excusable for a poor game in his first start, at Wolves.

It's symptomatic of how Benitez uses the flanks, trying to control the game out wide as he does in midfield. There are multiple pros and cons to the 'keep it tight' method in certain matches; it's one of the ongoing endless debates about Rafa's tactics. It's led to some brilliant performances in Europe and the league in previous years, but few if any in this one. We can argue about how many ways this season's gone wrong; I've come up with multiple excuses over the past months. And I'll unashamedly admit to stretching for ways to defend Benitez, but I've at least come to the conclusion that his thinking about the wings has to change.

The flanks have been at or near the top of the list of Liverpool's weak spots since Rafa arrived, mainly manned by Nuñez, Luis Garcia, Kewell, Pennant, Gonzalez, or Zenden prior to this crop. Of course, the combined cost of those players not including Kewell (bought by Houllier) is less than £15m and almost all in the fees for Pennant and Garcia. The cliché of not buying championships in bargain bins yet again rings true. And money's yet again the root of all evil, but Rafa hasn't helped himself in prioritizing other areas. And to compare to Benitez's Valencia, set out in a similar formation, Liverpool's never had a Vicente (or even a Rufete), and for some reason, hasn't gone out and got one.

The point of this isn't to single out individual players (although I clearly am), bash Benitez, or again snipe at the owners for not having any money. But it's apparent, even to a sycophant like me, that Liverpool and Benitez need to stop undervaluing the flanks.

I've written countless words about how the fullbacks ideally provide the width in Liverpool's system, but this season's made clear we're not in an ideal world. Johnson and Insua are a whole different kettle of fish, but suffice it to say that fullbacks bombing forward have been problematic for multiple reasons.

I try not to let solitary games affect me, especially solitary games where I pretend to expect Liverpool to lose, but Valencia might have been what finally prompted this post. Having a player who can create that sort of threat from out wide, drawing defenders and pinning wingers, absolutely can change a game. And you have to pay the premium for that presence. At the same time, you need workhorses and piano-carriers – just like Kuyt (who I'll continue to defend until the singularity reemerges) – which is why I'm focusing on the left flank.

I'm also well aware that both Babel and Benayoun are right-footed players probably best in other positions. I still question whether either can be a full-time starter on the left, and that Benitez has used Maxi there against United, Arsenal, City, and Everton means he does as well. It's a pity Riera's napalmed his bridges, but it's not as if he's done much of anything this season either. Although, to be fair, the combination of the three did lead Liverpool to its highest points total in years last season.

At the least, we've seen some continued attacking cohesion when Babel and Benayoun have been on the left, as we have when Maxi's been on the right. Kuyt's obviously going to start most games, but Maxi has and should continue to spell him at times, especially against lesser opposition, as against Pompey and Blackburn.

Long story short, pick a flank and stay there, at least for the rest of the season. And in the off-season, no matter what turmoil goes on (and there assuredly will be some turmoil), this is again the position I most want to see addressed.

Copy Chelsea

Four months into the season, and Liverpool still hasn’t deployed the first-choice XI thanks to injuries. And last week we got word that both Benayoun and Riera could be out for a month. Awesome.

Injury problems have consistently troubled Liverpool this season, but with those two missing, the left flank is a massive concern. Aurelio and Babel would be the only options on that flank, and neither seems a suitable replacement. Lucas played there a couple of times – notably, the 3-0 win against Sunderland in 07/08 – but hasn’t for over a year.

My advice? As much as it hurts to suggest, I’d copy the league leaders.



Oh yes, the much-maligned diamond formation. Even writing the phrase brings back bad memories of Sven-Goran Eriksson. Let’s soldier on, though.

Without wingers, the key to this formation is the fullbacks. But Liverpool already play with a variation on wingbacks in the 4-2-3-1, and in Johnson and Aurelio (or Insua), Liverpool have two excellent attacking fullbacks. The most frequent complaint with the 4-4-2 diamond is the lack of width, which shouldn’t be a problem with Johnson and Aurelio getting forward.

It’s a fluid formation that should allow for players to swap positions, as Benitez is wont to do in the 4-2-3-1. Kuyt, Gerrard, and Benayoun/Riera – as well as Torres – consistently change positions in the 4-2-3-1. Gerrard’s perpetually in a free role. Torres will drop deep or into one of the channels to link up play. The wingers switch flanks and drift inside. None of these facets are incompatible with the diamond formation.

At the same time, both Lucas and Aquilani are more mobile than Alonso, and have the versatility for this formation. We’ve seen how Lucas tries to get from box to box, and all reports suggest Aquilani plays similarly.

I’d also like to see how it affects Kuyt. The Dutchman’s disappointed for a few weeks now, since picking up a knock during the last international break. I wonder if moving him further upfield and more centrally will help his form. He’d have less defensive duties, and could focus more on attacking play. Plus, I’d like to see another striker shoulder some of burden on Torres, who hasn’t been fit enough to lead the line by himself. Yes, Torres is usually at his best as a lone striker, but if he’s not fully fit, he’s far less able single-handedly front the attack.

Now, this formation would put a lot of pressure on Mascherano and the centerbacks. In the 4-2-3-1, the wingers often drop deep to defend, especially if the fullbacks are upfield. With no wingers, it’ll be up to Mascherano and the centerbacks (and either Lucas or Aquilani, depending on which side of the field the ball is on) to cover the counter.

This admittedly worries me, especially given Mascherano’s form and Liverpool’s defensive fragility. It’s one thing to alter the formation when the team and players are on a hot streak; it’s another to use a new system when most if not all are struggling. But given where Liverpool’s struggled – reestablishing a dominant central midfield, scoring against packed defenses, and preventing stupid goals on the counter – it could be the remedy this team needs.

More importantly, the options are extremely limited without Benayoun and Riera. I’ve lost almost all faith in Babel, especially as a starter and on the left. Aurelio is a serviceable replacement, but he’s primarily a defender. Gerrard plays there for England, but Liverpool needs his talismanic performances in the middle, and the Gerrard/Torres pairing is what Liverpool needs to build around.

It doesn’t look that different from a Lampard-Deco-Ballack-Essien or Kaka-Gattuso-Seedorf-Pirlo midfield, both of which have given Liverpool fits in the past.

I doubt I’d argue for this formation if either Benayoun or Riera were available. But removing those two players severely weakens the team and the formation Benitez wants to play. Circumstances are what they are. Liverpool needs to do something to save the season, and using a formation that gets the best and fittest players on the pitch gives the team a fighting chance.

So what was the deal with the 3-4-3?

The team sheet and formation had a fair few confused, including yours truly, so I’ve been dwelling on Benitez’s possible rationale. Beware, this is going to get extra sycophantic.

Obviously, most important was the freshness of the team. It may have been a “second string” side, but it still included eight internationals (Carragher, Aurelio, and Ngog were the others) and on paper was better than Portsmouth at pretty much every position. It also included a few players with a point to prove – mainly Agger, Babel, and Ngog.

It may have included six defenders – again, more out of necessity – but that too had a purpose: congest the area around Crouch in an attempt to prevent any flick-ons, a plan that worked until the 62nd minute when Basinas hit an outstanding pass, both Carragher and Skrtel failed to close down the former Liverpool man, and Arbeloa couldn’t get back to cover Nugent. Both Arbeloa and Dossena did well to support the attack and stretch the field from wing-back, and Agger and Skrtel also got forward, bringing the ball out of defense when they had the space (which is why those two featured instead of Hyypia).

And even though Liverpool didn’t get the early goal, it’s not as if they weren’t creating more than in recent draws, even those against the likes of Stoke and Fulham. Benayoun, Aurelio (twice) and Mascherano all came close within the first 30 minutes. I’m sure Tony Adams didn’t expect this formation either, and catching the opposition unprepared had to be in Benitez’ mind.

Portsmouth most likely planned for what I’d guessed: most likely the 4-2-3-1 with a fatigued Torres up top, or possibly the 4-4-2 with Kuyt and either Babel or Ngog. And if either of those formations were the case, the home side would have attempted to strangle the life out of the game and hoof it up to Crouch, like we’ve seen from so many other sides so far this season.

Portsmouth may be gash of late, but they were always going to come to terms with the changes – the hope was to score before that happened. At this point, it started to look a bit like all the other games where Liverpool’s struggled to break down the opposition, even when they’ve had a full-strength squad.

And when Liverpool didn’t get the goal, Benitez made substitutions which changed the game: Kuyt to stretch it with his work ethic, Alonso to unlock it, and then the genius Torres, who was the most fatigued, in the last 15 minutes to provide that spark. I love it when a plan comes to fruition.

Now, two defensive mistakes almost made all that logic moot– but that’s football. And it’s not as if Liverpool were solely lucky: Nugent was arguably offside for the opener, Kuyt was arguably onside for the disallowed goal, and the foul that led to the free kick for Pompey’s second sure was arguable.

It is, after all, a thin line between genius and insanity. Crouch or Kranjcar could have deflected Aurelio’s free kick, Distin could have cleared prior to Kuyt’s goal, or Distin could have stayed closer to Torres instead of edging closer to his goal line. You know, all the normal moments that a game can turn on.

At the end of the day, what matters are the three points. And to think, at 1-2, I was worried Benitez was on pace to be questioned more than after any other result.

On Robbie Keane, for the last time

Over the last few weeks, I've made little secret of my belief that Robbie Keane wasn't going to work out. And Rafa displayed that renowned ruthless streak by shipping him out during the first window. But I want to make sure no one's thinking that I'm reveling in this news. Because, even though it strengthens the team by removing a major question (and seems to show that Liverpool will focus on the 4-2-3-1, which I believe is the right move), it weakens the team as well.

According to the BBC, the deal is for £12m in cold, hard currency, potentially rising to some unstated figure due to those ubiquitous incentives clauses. That's at least £7m that Liverpool's losing (Keane's fee was originally £19m, rising to £20.3m, even though all the stories I've seen today only quote the higher figure) at a time when money's tighter than (pick your sexual innuendo). £7m for 7 goals and 5 months of service, not to mention the 25 or so weeks of wages. And because the transfer's happened so late in the window, it looks as if there was no time to buy a replacement, if Benitez was even allowed access to the funds. It turns out Spurs (or Liverpool) didn't fancy a player exchange – which is fine with me, as the only player I'd want from their squad is Pavlyuchenko.

Granted, if there are no major injuries (I can't knock on wood hard enough), the squad should be okay. Torres, Kuyt, Babel, and Ngog can all theoretically play up top, even as a lone striker. The Torres and Gerrard partnership, with Alonso and Mascherano holding, is and remains the most important part of this team. And Robbie Keane hindered that, even though he’s a Liverpool fan, gave it his all, and didn’t shirk from the spotlight.

Now, what I want to see is Benitez experiment with his "wingers" more. Specifically, I want to see Benayoun on the left or right in games like those earlier infuriating draws, where Liverpool needs creativity. Similar goes for Babel. Apologies for the 1984-style mantras, but 4-2-3-1 is the way forward. 4-2-3-1 is Liverpool's best chance for success. Now, use it in pretty much every game here on out, but vary the flanks according to the opposition.

Then, with help from other teams, Liverpool might actually make a season out of this.

Gerrard, goals, and tactics

So, still frustrated following Sunday’s match and with questions over the tactics, I went back to see where Gerrard’s played when he scored, seeing as he has the most goals by a healthy margin. In addition, what formation and with what players on the field when Gerrard, and Liverpool, have scored said goals.

But before I get to the stats, I’m going to toss out a few disclaimers. First and foremost, it’s dumbing it down when I write about ‘4-2-3-1 v 4-4-2.’ It’s really a debate over two “holding” midfielders with Gerrard or two strikers in front of him. Take Blackburn for example – Gerrard, Alonso, and Masch all started, but Alonso played as far forward as Gerrard for the majority, and it could just as easily be described as 4-1-4-1. And 4-2-3-1 with Riera and Benayoun on the flanks is different than Babel and Kuyt. It’s also very, very different when Torres isn’t the lone striker.

So I reckon the clearest way to label it is “two holding midfielders with Gerrard” and “Gerrard as a central midfielder with two strikers.” Just so we’re clear.

These stats only include games where Gerrard’s started, which is 27 out of 34 games. He came off the bench in the draw against Liege and the win against United, and missed Villa (draw), Crewe (win, Carling Cup), Spurs (loss, Carling Cup), Fulham (draw), and PSV away (win). Liverpool’s record in games where Gerrard’s started is 17-9-1 with 48 total goals scored.

With two holding midfielders – 12
1-1 Everton 01.25.09 – draw
1-0 and 4-1 Newcastle 12.28.08 – win
1-2 and 2-2 Hull City 12.13.08 – draw
3-1 Blackburn 12.06.08 – win
1-0 Marseille 11.26.08 – win
2-0 Bolton 11.15.08 – win
1-1 (pen) Atletico 11.04.08 – draw
1-0 (pen) Portsmouth 10.29.08 – win
1-1 and 2-1 (pen) Marseille 09.16.08 – draw

Record: 9-6-1
Total Liverpool goals: 27
All Scorers: Gerrard 12; Alonso, Kuyt, Torres 3; Keane 2; Babel, Benayoun, Hyypia, Riera 1

As a central midfielder – 3
1-0 Everton 01.19.09 – draw
3-0 PSV 10.01.08 – win
2-1 Boro 08.23.08 – win

Record: 8-3-0
Total goals scored: 21
Scorers: Keane 5; Kuyt 4; Gerrard, Torres 3; Riera 2; Arbeloa, Carragher 1

Understandably, the three penalties don’t care as much weight as the other goals. But it’s worth noting they were three out of the four penalties won all season, and all penalties were won in that formation.

I can’t go without discussing Torres, who has a huge impact on both Liverpool’s fortune and tactics. He’s started 15 games this season. Nine – five wins, three draws and a loss – were with another striker and six – three wins and three draws – on his own up top.

So, what does any of this mean? Like the majority of Liverpool’s season so far, I’m left with more questions than answers. Gerrard’s at his most dangerous in a free role, but Liverpool’s totaled more draws and scored less goals per game. And most of those games have been without Torres. Keane, on the other hand, is top scorer when Liverpool uses Gerrard in a 4-4-2. Torres has played more games with another striker (usually Keane) than alone up top.

I’ll end with one final stat. There have been four games this season where both Gerrard and Torres have started with two holding midfielders. Liverpool’s won three of those (Marseille twice and Manchester City), with the lone draw coming in the last match.

Robbie Keane signs for 4 years

See, every now and then, Liverpool can actually complete transfers at something other than a snail's pace.

After posting about Robbie Keane on Saturday, I certainly didn't expect the deal to be finalized by Monday afternoon. Even as late as this morning, the Liverpool Echo was reporting that the medical would take place today, with an announcement no earlier than tomorrow.

So much for that. The fee is £19m, with the potential to rise up to £20.3m (which is a minimum of £12m more than Spurs paid for him). It's Liverpool's second-highest transfer fee ever. And Spurs are incensed, claiming that this is “an enforced sale.” The story on Tottenham’s official site is incredibly hilarious; I’d link it, but Tottenham’s web site seems to be down. I wonder why.

And you know what, the pace of the transfer is refreshing. Like with Babel last year, Rick Parry can get his finger out his ass to get some work done once in a while. Although, unlike with Babel, we'd heard rumors of this deal for a few weeks. But in comparison to Gareth Barry, who I first wrote about in May, this deal actually was completed (and I'm willing to bet good money that Barry isn't coming to Liverpool this summer).

Now, as I implied in the earlier post, I expect this transfer to alter Liverpool's tactics. For all intents and purposes, Keane is replacing Crouch, although the players have very different styles. But the addition of Keane should force a move away from the 4-2-3-1, as I don't expect him to play in Gerrard's role or in a wide position (at least, in a wide position like Kuyt does).

So let's take a look at the possibilities.

4-4-2
Reina
Arbeloa Carragher Agger Aurelio
Kuyt Gerrard Mascherano Babel
Keane Torres

or

Reina
Arbeloa Carragher Agger Aurelio
Gerrard Mascherano Alonso Babel
Keane Torres

3-5-2
Reina
Skrtel Carragher Agger
Arbeloa Mascherano Gerrard Alonso Aurelio
Keane Torres

4-3-3
Reina
Arbeloa Carragher Agger Aurelio
Gerrard Mascherano Alonso
Keane Torres Babel

4-1-3-2
Reina
Arbeloa Carragher Agger Aurelio
Mascherano
Kuyt Gerrard Babel
Keane Torres

To be perfectly honest, I don’t know which formation would be best, or even which Benitez is leaning toward. But if it were up to me, the 4-1-3-2 looks the strongest.

Notice how rarely I include Alonso, Skrtel and Kuyt, and how I didn't mention Degen, Dossena, Lucas or Voronin at all. It'll be interesting to see how Benitez rotates, and exactly what formation he sticks with.

A big complaint last season was that Benitez didn't know his best team until he settled with the 4-2-3-1 in February. Although I don't know if I fully subscribe to that theory, if Liverpool is going to improve on last season's performance, and finally compete as we hope they can, that cannot be the case this season. The team certainly needs to be more stable.

So this takes summer spending up to around £32m, with Keane, Dossena, Degen, Ngog and Cavalieri signed. About £20m has been recouped through the sales of Crouch, Riise, Guthrie and Carson with more likely to come.

We're getting to the point where I don't see the need to add any more "big-name" players to the line-up. Liverpool has a big enough squad, and they may well have a strong enough squad. Look at the players, both established and young, that I left out of those guessed line-ups. Now we need to learn which formation is most effective and stick with it, so Liverpool doesn't waste half a season figuring out what's the strongest line-up.