Because, for some reason, people ask me to.
If you're of the inclination to read far too many of my words (and why else would you be here?), I did an interview with Marc from Pandagoal over the weekend. You should check them out regardless of whether you care to read all my nonsense. I mean, what else do you have to do for the next couple of hours before the Holland/Uruguay match?
And if you get through the whole thing, you get a gold star. But see Marc for your gold star.
Showing posts with label Q and A. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Q and A. Show all posts
06 July 2010
05 March 2010
On Rafa Benitez: Part VI
The last part (don't look so excited) of Ed from Liverpool Offside and my conversation on Rafa Benitez's reign. Part VI is "Planning for the Future" – how Rafa's revamped the youth set-up. And as was the goal, Benitez is still Liverpool's manager by the time we finished this series.
Because the next match, at Wigan, is on Monday, I'll probably have the preview up early tomorrow instead of today. Maybe tonight, depending on the time of Rafa's presser, but we usually get info for Monday matches late.
Part VI: Planning for the Future
Intro | Managerial Record | Tactics | Man Management | Transfers | In the Media
Ed: While it's taken a little longer for this to wrap up, I think it's as good a time as any to talk about the groundwork Rafa is laying for his future at the club. I'm speaking, of course, about the much-lauded capture of Raheem Sterling from QPR. He's apparently quite the young talent, and at the tender age of 15, there's plenty of time to get him developed in the Academy. Or, as it's been put by some commenters on the Liverpool Way, plenty of time to coach out any natural ability he's got. Wait, what?
The development of the youth system under Rafa Benitez has been an area of heightened criticism for quite some time. Obviously everyone references Arsenal as though they constantly turn coal to diamonds with their young talent, and in many cases it's with good reason. But there's always a certain amount of gambling involved with younger players--they could go the way of Gerrard and Carragher, or they could go the way of...those guys we never heard of that never made it. And that happens at any club, not just Liverpool. Even Arsenal!
But of course with Rafa it's a production, and the major talking point for me is the "doesn't give young players enough of a chance." On the one hand this is something that makes a lot of sense and is pretty concerning. There's players like Nemeth and San Jose going out on loans and then, if you're to believe the media, working towards making those loans permanent. It's one thing to bring in plenty of young talent, it's completely another to bring in that young talent and never give them any time on the pitch.
Of course, the opposing point to that is that player development takes time--sometimes lots of it. There's always going to be a bit of settling in period for a new manager, and the first team responsibilities are the top priority. And we saw Rafa slowly but surely take control over the Academy, particularly with the overhaul at the end of last season, which saw him dismiss some major figures in the youth system (Gary Ablett, Hughie McAuley, Dave Shannon, and Piet Hamberg) in an effort to get more players from the Academy to the first team. Appointing Jose Segura, formerly the Barcelona youth director, further indicated Rafa's commitment to the Academy, and the return of Kenny Dalglish in a "senior role" seemed to cement it.
My hope for this section is that we'll look at two major things: what Rafa's done thus far, and what it is that he seems to be gearing the club for. So to address the first part, how do you think he's done? What more could/should he have done as it relates to the club's younger talent?
nate: The best thing about Raheem Sterling's capture – outside of the obvious fact he's a highly-lauded English prospect – was pointed out in by a commenter on my blog (Hi Georger!). He'll have the best nickname in history. "Sideshow Raheem" will never be topped.
But seriously, it's still hard to gauge Rafa's capacity for planning for the future even after almost six seasons. It takes that long for these players to develop, and such was the state of the Academy when Benitez arrived.
We're just now seeing sown seeds reaped with the likes of Insua, Pacheco, Kelly, Spearing, and Ayala. Kelly and Spearing both came from the Academy, graduating in 2007, the same summer Pacheco and Ayala came from Spain at 17. Insua came to Liverpool having just turned 18 in January 2007. And the likes of Nemeth and San Jose, also signed around the same time, don't seem far away. Benitez's first crop of youngsters – Barragan, Roque, Hobbs, Antwi, and Anderson – didn't have the hoped-for success stories, but the next crop seems much more promising, and are just starting to get their chances.
I wish I saw more of the reserves and Academy; yet another pitfall of being on the other side of the ocean. But there are rumblings – good rumblings – about players in each of the age groups after Pacheco/Kelly/Spearing/etc. Gulasci, Mavinga, Dalla Valle, and Bruna in the reserves; Ince, Pepper, Coady, Ngoo, Wisdom, Suso, and Sterling in the Academy. And it's a healthy mix of English and European players as well. But it'll be years until we know how successful they truly are.
I don't want this to turn into another Houllier-bashing session. Houllier was great for rebuilding Melwood and the Academy. He may not have been able to develop the young players, but he knew what kind of facilities and programs were needed. However, the quality of Academy products, whether English or foreign, dwindled to a trickle under Gerard. Liverpool's just now recovering, whether it's in young foreigners (Insua, Pacheco) or local products (Spearing, Kelly).
Kenny coming back can only be good news for the local production line. Liverpool has been losing too much Merseyside talent to the lot across Stanley Park – Rodwell and Baxter immediately spring to mind, and there are rumors Pepper may join them. Both Carra and Gerrard wrote glowingly about Dalglish and his influence on them when they were Academy products in their autobiographies, even if Heighway was more important to their development. Even kids today still remember Dalglish's exploits as manager – nearly 20 years after the fact – if not as a player. That's the kind of legacy King Kenny has, and that alone should help Liverpool recruit better talent.
Before we get ahead of ourselves, I feel duty-bound to note that young player development isn't entirely Rafa's department. Don't get me wrong, the manager identifies targets, hires staff like Segura, Shannon, and Ablett, and promotes players to Melwood. But he's not their hands-on manager, and thus, can't truly be blamed if starlets fail to pan out.
I don't know what more he can/could have done. Scouting youth talent is like throwing at a dartboard from 40 yards away. Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you even hit the bullseye, but there are just as many, if not more, misses. At the least, Rafa has been diligent about revitalizing and broadening the scouting network, signing talent, and giving young players chances, even if we'd like to see some thrown in the deep end sooner. But, like with many things Benitez, conservatism usually rules the day.
Liverpool needs to get back to producing homegrown talent, at least one or two per generation, no matter whether they were born in L4, London, or Madrid. So far, little by little, it looks like we might be reaching that goal.
Ed: And as for the goal of making sense of Rafa Benitez, I think I've gone about as far as I can go in the effort. In one way or another, I feel like we have nearly touched on it all. And that which we haven't touched on was noted in comments, but had we tried to address those this would have accompanied the 2010-2011 season preview. Looking back, though, I'm not sure any sense was made, certainly not for lack of effort.
I'd usually be more unsettled ending this way, without any sort of definitive conclusions, but this was always going to be a fool's errand. As long as Rafa is at the club, it seems like there will be some sort of unanswered questions, disconnections between he and the media, and questions about what he could have or should have done. Even the six sections we used, in hindsight, weren't nearly enough. Sure, we touched on it all, but without any more than a casual/bordering on obsessive understanding of the way Liverpool operates from an ocean away, Rafa's going to be a mystery.
But more than anything, I think this provided some much needed perspective. Particularly on my end, it's easy to jump to conclusions about the way Rafa has handled his role as manager in the past five and a half seasons. The "what have you done for me lately" mentality is easy to come by, and I have been no different when it comes to Rafa. But going through this, taking a step back and looking at the "facts," has me questioning the knee-jerk reactions I've previously made.
It doesn't leave me convinced, though, and if anything I might be more confused. I'm convinced he's too stubborn and set in his ways at times, but then he pulls off some of the most magical bullshit-seeming tactics and leads the side to stunning victories. He's alienated players and underused others, but he's helped players like Pepe Reina and Fernando Torres flourish to ridiculous heights. He cuts a stoic figure on the touchline and in the pressroom, but then he can cut it loose and serve up members of the press and Alex Ferguson. I quit.
So it's been a long haul, and I'm greatly appreciative of your willingness to take part. Hopefully it's been more worthwhile than it has been confusing for you and your readers.
nate: Isn't this the fun of having blogs? Of watching countless matches and writing countless words? To second guess paid professionals for a "hobby?"
There were never going to be any definite conclusions or resolutions, especially mid-season. We're never going to understand everything Benitez does. He does this for a living and he's privy to so much more information than we'll ever be. But the game is in trying to explain it, and my rationalizations – wrongheaded or not – are an attempt at some sort of sanity in the often overblown world of Liverpool/soccer/sports.
Because, at the end of the day, this is supposed to be fun. Even if this season's results have made that much less likely.
However, this back-and-forth has been a blast, and I appreciate both the opportunity and your willingness to direct this farce. Lord knows had I been responsible for starting conversations and providing paths for discussion, this would never have been finished.
I hope, at the least, it's provided some food for thought. But who am I kidding? At the least, I hope it got read.
Because the next match, at Wigan, is on Monday, I'll probably have the preview up early tomorrow instead of today. Maybe tonight, depending on the time of Rafa's presser, but we usually get info for Monday matches late.
Part VI: Planning for the Future
Intro | Managerial Record | Tactics | Man Management | Transfers | In the Media
Ed: While it's taken a little longer for this to wrap up, I think it's as good a time as any to talk about the groundwork Rafa is laying for his future at the club. I'm speaking, of course, about the much-lauded capture of Raheem Sterling from QPR. He's apparently quite the young talent, and at the tender age of 15, there's plenty of time to get him developed in the Academy. Or, as it's been put by some commenters on the Liverpool Way, plenty of time to coach out any natural ability he's got. Wait, what?
The development of the youth system under Rafa Benitez has been an area of heightened criticism for quite some time. Obviously everyone references Arsenal as though they constantly turn coal to diamonds with their young talent, and in many cases it's with good reason. But there's always a certain amount of gambling involved with younger players--they could go the way of Gerrard and Carragher, or they could go the way of...those guys we never heard of that never made it. And that happens at any club, not just Liverpool. Even Arsenal!
But of course with Rafa it's a production, and the major talking point for me is the "doesn't give young players enough of a chance." On the one hand this is something that makes a lot of sense and is pretty concerning. There's players like Nemeth and San Jose going out on loans and then, if you're to believe the media, working towards making those loans permanent. It's one thing to bring in plenty of young talent, it's completely another to bring in that young talent and never give them any time on the pitch.
Of course, the opposing point to that is that player development takes time--sometimes lots of it. There's always going to be a bit of settling in period for a new manager, and the first team responsibilities are the top priority. And we saw Rafa slowly but surely take control over the Academy, particularly with the overhaul at the end of last season, which saw him dismiss some major figures in the youth system (Gary Ablett, Hughie McAuley, Dave Shannon, and Piet Hamberg) in an effort to get more players from the Academy to the first team. Appointing Jose Segura, formerly the Barcelona youth director, further indicated Rafa's commitment to the Academy, and the return of Kenny Dalglish in a "senior role" seemed to cement it.
My hope for this section is that we'll look at two major things: what Rafa's done thus far, and what it is that he seems to be gearing the club for. So to address the first part, how do you think he's done? What more could/should he have done as it relates to the club's younger talent?
nate: The best thing about Raheem Sterling's capture – outside of the obvious fact he's a highly-lauded English prospect – was pointed out in by a commenter on my blog (Hi Georger!). He'll have the best nickname in history. "Sideshow Raheem" will never be topped.
But seriously, it's still hard to gauge Rafa's capacity for planning for the future even after almost six seasons. It takes that long for these players to develop, and such was the state of the Academy when Benitez arrived.
We're just now seeing sown seeds reaped with the likes of Insua, Pacheco, Kelly, Spearing, and Ayala. Kelly and Spearing both came from the Academy, graduating in 2007, the same summer Pacheco and Ayala came from Spain at 17. Insua came to Liverpool having just turned 18 in January 2007. And the likes of Nemeth and San Jose, also signed around the same time, don't seem far away. Benitez's first crop of youngsters – Barragan, Roque, Hobbs, Antwi, and Anderson – didn't have the hoped-for success stories, but the next crop seems much more promising, and are just starting to get their chances.
I wish I saw more of the reserves and Academy; yet another pitfall of being on the other side of the ocean. But there are rumblings – good rumblings – about players in each of the age groups after Pacheco/Kelly/Spearing/etc. Gulasci, Mavinga, Dalla Valle, and Bruna in the reserves; Ince, Pepper, Coady, Ngoo, Wisdom, Suso, and Sterling in the Academy. And it's a healthy mix of English and European players as well. But it'll be years until we know how successful they truly are.
I don't want this to turn into another Houllier-bashing session. Houllier was great for rebuilding Melwood and the Academy. He may not have been able to develop the young players, but he knew what kind of facilities and programs were needed. However, the quality of Academy products, whether English or foreign, dwindled to a trickle under Gerard. Liverpool's just now recovering, whether it's in young foreigners (Insua, Pacheco) or local products (Spearing, Kelly).
Kenny coming back can only be good news for the local production line. Liverpool has been losing too much Merseyside talent to the lot across Stanley Park – Rodwell and Baxter immediately spring to mind, and there are rumors Pepper may join them. Both Carra and Gerrard wrote glowingly about Dalglish and his influence on them when they were Academy products in their autobiographies, even if Heighway was more important to their development. Even kids today still remember Dalglish's exploits as manager – nearly 20 years after the fact – if not as a player. That's the kind of legacy King Kenny has, and that alone should help Liverpool recruit better talent.
Before we get ahead of ourselves, I feel duty-bound to note that young player development isn't entirely Rafa's department. Don't get me wrong, the manager identifies targets, hires staff like Segura, Shannon, and Ablett, and promotes players to Melwood. But he's not their hands-on manager, and thus, can't truly be blamed if starlets fail to pan out.
I don't know what more he can/could have done. Scouting youth talent is like throwing at a dartboard from 40 yards away. Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you even hit the bullseye, but there are just as many, if not more, misses. At the least, Rafa has been diligent about revitalizing and broadening the scouting network, signing talent, and giving young players chances, even if we'd like to see some thrown in the deep end sooner. But, like with many things Benitez, conservatism usually rules the day.
Liverpool needs to get back to producing homegrown talent, at least one or two per generation, no matter whether they were born in L4, London, or Madrid. So far, little by little, it looks like we might be reaching that goal.
Ed: And as for the goal of making sense of Rafa Benitez, I think I've gone about as far as I can go in the effort. In one way or another, I feel like we have nearly touched on it all. And that which we haven't touched on was noted in comments, but had we tried to address those this would have accompanied the 2010-2011 season preview. Looking back, though, I'm not sure any sense was made, certainly not for lack of effort.
I'd usually be more unsettled ending this way, without any sort of definitive conclusions, but this was always going to be a fool's errand. As long as Rafa is at the club, it seems like there will be some sort of unanswered questions, disconnections between he and the media, and questions about what he could have or should have done. Even the six sections we used, in hindsight, weren't nearly enough. Sure, we touched on it all, but without any more than a casual/bordering on obsessive understanding of the way Liverpool operates from an ocean away, Rafa's going to be a mystery.
But more than anything, I think this provided some much needed perspective. Particularly on my end, it's easy to jump to conclusions about the way Rafa has handled his role as manager in the past five and a half seasons. The "what have you done for me lately" mentality is easy to come by, and I have been no different when it comes to Rafa. But going through this, taking a step back and looking at the "facts," has me questioning the knee-jerk reactions I've previously made.
It doesn't leave me convinced, though, and if anything I might be more confused. I'm convinced he's too stubborn and set in his ways at times, but then he pulls off some of the most magical bullshit-seeming tactics and leads the side to stunning victories. He's alienated players and underused others, but he's helped players like Pepe Reina and Fernando Torres flourish to ridiculous heights. He cuts a stoic figure on the touchline and in the pressroom, but then he can cut it loose and serve up members of the press and Alex Ferguson. I quit.
So it's been a long haul, and I'm greatly appreciative of your willingness to take part. Hopefully it's been more worthwhile than it has been confusing for you and your readers.
nate: Isn't this the fun of having blogs? Of watching countless matches and writing countless words? To second guess paid professionals for a "hobby?"
There were never going to be any definite conclusions or resolutions, especially mid-season. We're never going to understand everything Benitez does. He does this for a living and he's privy to so much more information than we'll ever be. But the game is in trying to explain it, and my rationalizations – wrongheaded or not – are an attempt at some sort of sanity in the often overblown world of Liverpool/soccer/sports.
Because, at the end of the day, this is supposed to be fun. Even if this season's results have made that much less likely.
However, this back-and-forth has been a blast, and I appreciate both the opportunity and your willingness to direct this farce. Lord knows had I been responsible for starting conversations and providing paths for discussion, this would never have been finished.
I hope, at the least, it's provided some food for thought. But who am I kidding? At the least, I hope it got read.
15 February 2010
On Rafa Benitez: Part V
The continuing series between Ed from Liverpool Offside and I on Rafa Benitez's reign. Part V is on media relations – how Rafa deals with and is portrayed by the media.
Part V: In the Press
Intro | Managerial Record | Tactics | Man Management | Transfers
Ed: I'm always hesitant to give much weight to clubs, players, managers, whoever when they talk about the unfair treatment they receive from the media. My default position on these types of things has usually been "you asked for it, you got it;" it simply comes with the territory of being a professional athlete. They find themselves as the story on a daily basis whether it relates to sport or not, and while at times it's likely a bit of a burden (slight understatement), I think they also gain a tremendous amount of validation and power that comes from the constant attention.
As supporters we do the same thing, just without the pressure or power. I know that I'm prone to calling immediate bullshit on anything negative written about Liverpool, or at least anything negative that doesn't line up with any negative feelings I already had. I'm especially likely to push the spoon away if I feel like I'm being force-fed a blatant literary agenda---I'm my own man dammit, and I'll form my own opinions. But how long do you stave off the narrative that's being written (to borrow your phrase) before it almost insidiously creeps into your psyche and starts to shape your view?
With Rafa Benitez it's tough to tell what's created and what's real, and the unfortunate thing for us is that we'll never really know fact from fiction. But I think we (speaking of supporters in general) should at least try to do so on both ends of the spectrum---smart enough to call bullshit on the good and bad press and not accepting of a perception that's being created for us.
Obviously the first thing that many people will think of with this topic is Facts, Rafa's one-man drama in January of 2009. Talking to the media largely about Sir Alex Ferguson and the preferential treatment United receive, it was...f***ing awesome. At least that's what my first thought was after seeing it. Sure, I thought it was brash, ballsy, and slightly bizarre, but what more could you want? He was never out of control, he threw his hat in the media game, and actually made some valid points.
But then comes the aftershocks. "Disturbed." "Crazy." "Astonishing." "Heading for a Keegan-style breakdown." And in the time since, that has become one of the defining moments in Rafa's time at Liverpool, and it can't be defined as anything but failure. It's parody at this point. Shit, the guy even parodied himself earlier this season. Although I can't help but think that it wasn't that big of a deal, not that crazy, not that astonishing. What we read afterward certainly was, as we were able to see Sir Alex striking the stupefied victim the rest of the season, vindicated by United's ability to win yet another title. Really showed Rafa. Made him eat his words. Just "looking after his family." Played Rafa perfectly.
All of that, though, is if we're to believe that the intent of Facts was a manipulative act by a man who was seizing on the brink of madness, desperate to play old Red-Nose's game. In that light, you can't help but view it as failure. But I think about my initial reaction vs. where I stand on it, even now. Was it that crazy? Am I completely incapable of original thought? Or is it just that I have original thoughts, but they're so fragile that they can be shaped by the press an ocean away?
I don't intend for Facts to be the sole focus of our discussion here, but as I mentioned, it can't help but be the first thing that people think of. And as you brought up earlier, there's much more to this than one press conference. So I'm interested in your take on this, but also the role that media's played in Rafa's time at the club.
nate: For once, I might not know my history well enough. And this conversation is one where being on the opposite side of the ocean makes it harder to fully comprehend. But it seems like Liverpool's been both target and scapegoat since Thatcher's days. It's near impossible to relate to as an outsider, but I wouldn't trust a media that claimed Liverpudlians pissed on and robbed from their own dead either. Whether an anti-LFC bias is due to consistent and comprehensive Liverpool successes in the 70s and 80s or Thatcher's persecution of the industrial north is debatable. But I don't think it's simply imagined.
I'm in complete agreement with how you saw 'Rafa's rant.' I thought it was brilliant, and more importantly, necessary. Every single word was true. Granted, I'm clearly biased, but United always seems to get preferential treatment, whether it's in the amount of injury time added, soft penalties, or whatnot.
Rafa is never out of control. His press conferences have become far more revealing and entertaining as his grasp of English has improved (being able to understand his Spanish interviews made 10 years of taking the language in school worthwhile), but he's always known exactly what he's saying. That's why the coverage of the "rant" seemed to disproportionate to me. Nothing was ranted. And nothing was wrong. When Ferguson or Mourinho do it, it's mind games. When it's Benitez, he's disturbed.
'Rafa's rant' never reached the comedic heights of Keegan's ‘I’D LOVE IT!’ speech. But the media made out as if he came into the briefing room foaming at the mouth and lifted his leg on the press corps. That Liverpool went into their usual mid-Winter slump starting with the next fixture only fed into the "he's cracking up" narrative that Fleet Street was so eager to promote. And United being United, getting to the top of the table and just staying there, evidently proved Benitez's blistering insanity. Or something. You know what? The season turns out exactly the same if Rafa never ranted. United was (gulp) deeper and more experienced.
The zonal marking debate is another of my favorites played out in the media. Benitez handled it perfectly prior to the Derby, making me wish he'd made the statement years earlier. Zonal marking and Liverpool's susceptibility on set plays has been a stick frequently used to beat Benitez. I've argued in the past that it's down to the players more than the system – zonal marking and set plays were far less of a problem with Hyypia in the team – but the media seem convinced it's the system's fault. Andy Gray and his Sky Sports brethren love bringing it up. Benitez's response in reference to Tim Cahill will probably silence that criticism for a while, though. You might not know it from reading the papers, but he can actually be witty sometimes.
Prior to "zonal marking," it was "rotation." Remember when Rafa went 99 games without using the same line-up in consecutive games? It’s still being mocked. The same newspaper has repeatedly lauded Ferguson’s United for the exact same tactics.
I realize that what many see as "media bias" is just the media's self-interest in selling as many papers as possible. Both controversy and Liverpool sell papers. Liverpool controversy seems to sell even more. Plus, there's a bit of South Park's take on The Lottery in it; build them up to bring them down, and kick them on their way down.
Because if it's not that, my only conclusion is there's some sort of xenophobia involved. I know that's a reach – Rafa's not the only foreign manager in England – but he certainly seems to court more criticism that the likes of Ferguson, Redknapp, O'Neill, or even Hughes. I'm still stunned how quickly pundits lined up to suggest Benitez should be sacked earlier this season. Hughes got an easier ride when City were drawing almost every match, and now he's the one out of a job.
So is it just paranoia or are they really out to get us?
Ed: One of the things you touch on, particularly in relation to "the rant," is a lack of cause and effect when it comes to press conferences and pitch results. I think it flatters managers, whether it's Rafa, Ferguson, Mourinho, whoever, to say that their words on a Thursday or Friday will have a direct impact on Saturday or Sunday's result. For me, that's as clear a case of media manipulation as any--the "posterboard material" that spurs a team onto victory. And in many cases, it's also wrongly applied to the course of the season. Nevermind that after Rafa foamed at the mouth Liverpool went on arguably one of the finest runs in recent memory, including a 4-1 humbling of Ferguson's United at Old Trafford. But Rafa had already cursed the season back in January, right? No matter that Liverpool had started to slip in November, first drawing with Fulham, then West Ham, then Hull, as well as Arsenal at the Emirates. If anything, his rant had...no impact.
I'm in agreement that the thrust of the media's intent can be lost in the Trans-Atlantic shuffle--I'm lost as to how Rafa can be roundly criticized for that, while stateside we watch Denny Green blow a gasket, Mike Gundy preach about manhood, or Bobby Cox break his own record for number of times getting tossed from a game and then forget about it the next day. Chalk it up to being American. But I do think there's something about Liverpool in the post Spice-Boys era that makes the club easy to mock. Decades of success combined with pomp and no follow-through makes for an easy target, and while the Houllier and Benitez years have been a stark shift from those days, I think there's a residual resentment that could only be refuted with a championship. Liverpool are the easy target for their failure to win league since 1990 in the same way that it's easy to say Chelsea are as green as they are blue, or that Arsenal play lovely football but can't finish. Of course, both those mentioned have more recent titles to assuage any faltering self-esteem.
And with Rafa it's taken the next logical step given his early success. You brought up the idea that he's a victim of his own success in an earlier section, and I think it's just as applicable here. He won the Champions League and FA Cup in his first two years and was the darling of Merseyside. But whether it was a lack of mastery of the English language or a reluctance to assert himself in the press, he was as anonymous as a manager of Liverpool can be in the media. This might be my relative inexperience as a Liverpool fan, but I'm hard-pressed to identify any memorable press conferences, good or bad, from Rafa prior to January of 2009.
One of the things that's easy to lose sight of, at least for me, is that there's always a counter to what we read in the press, but you'll never read it on a large scale. Zonal marking is a perfect example--that link you provided is something that few outside of eseason subscribers will have seen, and it might have gotten an inch or two in the papers. What we never hear is that whether it's man marking or zonal marking, men are still responsible for the execution, and it's men who are largely at fault for gaps in either system. Completely without supporting evidence, I'd be comfortable in asserting that the breakdown in the system wasn't necessarily due to a faulty system, but faulty execution. It's always going to come down to the figurehead, and rightfully so in some cases. But the responsibility can only go so far beyond the touchline.
So is it xenophobia? It's not something I feel qualified to comment on, given how removed I am from the climate and culture. But there is a "different-ness" that managers like Benitez and Wenger have that ruffles some sort of feathers. Fergie is lovably British, Ol' 'Arry has endless anecdotes, and there's a familiarity with O'Neill that's comforting. That doesn't really exist with Benitez, and when it comes along with a failure to win league, a lack of positive results, occasional lapses in tactics or performances, it's almost hard not to find fault.
nate: I think you hit the nail on the head with the line: "Decades of success combined with pomp and no follow-through makes for an easy target, and while the Houllier and Benitez years have been a stark shift from those days, I think there's a residual resentment that could only be refuted with a championship." It's something I should have been clearer about in the last section. Liverpool are an easy target for mutually dependent reasons: one, because the club used to win titles religiously, and two, because they haven't won the league in going on two decades. It's not quite pre-2004 Red Sox, but there are parallels.
And simply having Benitez as manager increases that pressure because of the reasons we've elucidated. He's not a media darling, nor is he eminently quotable, and that he's a foreign manager feeds into some of the British media's stereotypes. I like that you compared Benitez to Wenger; the two managers have been defending the other in public recently, both before and after the Liverpool/Arsenal match. Both foreign managers, both under increasing pressure to end the trophy drought. Football makes strange bedfellows.
You say that there have been few memorable press conferences, but since when are press conferences supposed to be memorable? To continue with American sports references, they can't all be Jim Mora's "PLAYOFFS???!?!" The sole purpose is to feed the beast prior to kickoff. And maybe that's the problem. Mourinho fed the beast. Ferguson, when he's not avoiding post-match interviews so he can start drinking sooner, feeds the beast. Redknapp assuredly feeds the beast, and with a lovable Cockney accent to boot. Benitez, on the other hand, wasn't fluent in English for the first few years and doesn't suffer fools. And when the beast isn't fed, it writes its own headlines. And we get to read about how Rafa ranted Liverpool out of the title race.
Part V: In the Press
Intro | Managerial Record | Tactics | Man Management | Transfers
Ed: I'm always hesitant to give much weight to clubs, players, managers, whoever when they talk about the unfair treatment they receive from the media. My default position on these types of things has usually been "you asked for it, you got it;" it simply comes with the territory of being a professional athlete. They find themselves as the story on a daily basis whether it relates to sport or not, and while at times it's likely a bit of a burden (slight understatement), I think they also gain a tremendous amount of validation and power that comes from the constant attention.
As supporters we do the same thing, just without the pressure or power. I know that I'm prone to calling immediate bullshit on anything negative written about Liverpool, or at least anything negative that doesn't line up with any negative feelings I already had. I'm especially likely to push the spoon away if I feel like I'm being force-fed a blatant literary agenda---I'm my own man dammit, and I'll form my own opinions. But how long do you stave off the narrative that's being written (to borrow your phrase) before it almost insidiously creeps into your psyche and starts to shape your view?
With Rafa Benitez it's tough to tell what's created and what's real, and the unfortunate thing for us is that we'll never really know fact from fiction. But I think we (speaking of supporters in general) should at least try to do so on both ends of the spectrum---smart enough to call bullshit on the good and bad press and not accepting of a perception that's being created for us.
Obviously the first thing that many people will think of with this topic is Facts, Rafa's one-man drama in January of 2009. Talking to the media largely about Sir Alex Ferguson and the preferential treatment United receive, it was...f***ing awesome. At least that's what my first thought was after seeing it. Sure, I thought it was brash, ballsy, and slightly bizarre, but what more could you want? He was never out of control, he threw his hat in the media game, and actually made some valid points.
But then comes the aftershocks. "Disturbed." "Crazy." "Astonishing." "Heading for a Keegan-style breakdown." And in the time since, that has become one of the defining moments in Rafa's time at Liverpool, and it can't be defined as anything but failure. It's parody at this point. Shit, the guy even parodied himself earlier this season. Although I can't help but think that it wasn't that big of a deal, not that crazy, not that astonishing. What we read afterward certainly was, as we were able to see Sir Alex striking the stupefied victim the rest of the season, vindicated by United's ability to win yet another title. Really showed Rafa. Made him eat his words. Just "looking after his family." Played Rafa perfectly.
All of that, though, is if we're to believe that the intent of Facts was a manipulative act by a man who was seizing on the brink of madness, desperate to play old Red-Nose's game. In that light, you can't help but view it as failure. But I think about my initial reaction vs. where I stand on it, even now. Was it that crazy? Am I completely incapable of original thought? Or is it just that I have original thoughts, but they're so fragile that they can be shaped by the press an ocean away?
I don't intend for Facts to be the sole focus of our discussion here, but as I mentioned, it can't help but be the first thing that people think of. And as you brought up earlier, there's much more to this than one press conference. So I'm interested in your take on this, but also the role that media's played in Rafa's time at the club.
nate: For once, I might not know my history well enough. And this conversation is one where being on the opposite side of the ocean makes it harder to fully comprehend. But it seems like Liverpool's been both target and scapegoat since Thatcher's days. It's near impossible to relate to as an outsider, but I wouldn't trust a media that claimed Liverpudlians pissed on and robbed from their own dead either. Whether an anti-LFC bias is due to consistent and comprehensive Liverpool successes in the 70s and 80s or Thatcher's persecution of the industrial north is debatable. But I don't think it's simply imagined.
I'm in complete agreement with how you saw 'Rafa's rant.' I thought it was brilliant, and more importantly, necessary. Every single word was true. Granted, I'm clearly biased, but United always seems to get preferential treatment, whether it's in the amount of injury time added, soft penalties, or whatnot.
Rafa is never out of control. His press conferences have become far more revealing and entertaining as his grasp of English has improved (being able to understand his Spanish interviews made 10 years of taking the language in school worthwhile), but he's always known exactly what he's saying. That's why the coverage of the "rant" seemed to disproportionate to me. Nothing was ranted. And nothing was wrong. When Ferguson or Mourinho do it, it's mind games. When it's Benitez, he's disturbed.
'Rafa's rant' never reached the comedic heights of Keegan's ‘I’D LOVE IT!’ speech. But the media made out as if he came into the briefing room foaming at the mouth and lifted his leg on the press corps. That Liverpool went into their usual mid-Winter slump starting with the next fixture only fed into the "he's cracking up" narrative that Fleet Street was so eager to promote. And United being United, getting to the top of the table and just staying there, evidently proved Benitez's blistering insanity. Or something. You know what? The season turns out exactly the same if Rafa never ranted. United was (gulp) deeper and more experienced.
The zonal marking debate is another of my favorites played out in the media. Benitez handled it perfectly prior to the Derby, making me wish he'd made the statement years earlier. Zonal marking and Liverpool's susceptibility on set plays has been a stick frequently used to beat Benitez. I've argued in the past that it's down to the players more than the system – zonal marking and set plays were far less of a problem with Hyypia in the team – but the media seem convinced it's the system's fault. Andy Gray and his Sky Sports brethren love bringing it up. Benitez's response in reference to Tim Cahill will probably silence that criticism for a while, though. You might not know it from reading the papers, but he can actually be witty sometimes.
Prior to "zonal marking," it was "rotation." Remember when Rafa went 99 games without using the same line-up in consecutive games? It’s still being mocked. The same newspaper has repeatedly lauded Ferguson’s United for the exact same tactics.
I realize that what many see as "media bias" is just the media's self-interest in selling as many papers as possible. Both controversy and Liverpool sell papers. Liverpool controversy seems to sell even more. Plus, there's a bit of South Park's take on The Lottery in it; build them up to bring them down, and kick them on their way down.
Because if it's not that, my only conclusion is there's some sort of xenophobia involved. I know that's a reach – Rafa's not the only foreign manager in England – but he certainly seems to court more criticism that the likes of Ferguson, Redknapp, O'Neill, or even Hughes. I'm still stunned how quickly pundits lined up to suggest Benitez should be sacked earlier this season. Hughes got an easier ride when City were drawing almost every match, and now he's the one out of a job.
So is it just paranoia or are they really out to get us?
Ed: One of the things you touch on, particularly in relation to "the rant," is a lack of cause and effect when it comes to press conferences and pitch results. I think it flatters managers, whether it's Rafa, Ferguson, Mourinho, whoever, to say that their words on a Thursday or Friday will have a direct impact on Saturday or Sunday's result. For me, that's as clear a case of media manipulation as any--the "posterboard material" that spurs a team onto victory. And in many cases, it's also wrongly applied to the course of the season. Nevermind that after Rafa foamed at the mouth Liverpool went on arguably one of the finest runs in recent memory, including a 4-1 humbling of Ferguson's United at Old Trafford. But Rafa had already cursed the season back in January, right? No matter that Liverpool had started to slip in November, first drawing with Fulham, then West Ham, then Hull, as well as Arsenal at the Emirates. If anything, his rant had...no impact.
I'm in agreement that the thrust of the media's intent can be lost in the Trans-Atlantic shuffle--I'm lost as to how Rafa can be roundly criticized for that, while stateside we watch Denny Green blow a gasket, Mike Gundy preach about manhood, or Bobby Cox break his own record for number of times getting tossed from a game and then forget about it the next day. Chalk it up to being American. But I do think there's something about Liverpool in the post Spice-Boys era that makes the club easy to mock. Decades of success combined with pomp and no follow-through makes for an easy target, and while the Houllier and Benitez years have been a stark shift from those days, I think there's a residual resentment that could only be refuted with a championship. Liverpool are the easy target for their failure to win league since 1990 in the same way that it's easy to say Chelsea are as green as they are blue, or that Arsenal play lovely football but can't finish. Of course, both those mentioned have more recent titles to assuage any faltering self-esteem.
And with Rafa it's taken the next logical step given his early success. You brought up the idea that he's a victim of his own success in an earlier section, and I think it's just as applicable here. He won the Champions League and FA Cup in his first two years and was the darling of Merseyside. But whether it was a lack of mastery of the English language or a reluctance to assert himself in the press, he was as anonymous as a manager of Liverpool can be in the media. This might be my relative inexperience as a Liverpool fan, but I'm hard-pressed to identify any memorable press conferences, good or bad, from Rafa prior to January of 2009.
One of the things that's easy to lose sight of, at least for me, is that there's always a counter to what we read in the press, but you'll never read it on a large scale. Zonal marking is a perfect example--that link you provided is something that few outside of eseason subscribers will have seen, and it might have gotten an inch or two in the papers. What we never hear is that whether it's man marking or zonal marking, men are still responsible for the execution, and it's men who are largely at fault for gaps in either system. Completely without supporting evidence, I'd be comfortable in asserting that the breakdown in the system wasn't necessarily due to a faulty system, but faulty execution. It's always going to come down to the figurehead, and rightfully so in some cases. But the responsibility can only go so far beyond the touchline.
So is it xenophobia? It's not something I feel qualified to comment on, given how removed I am from the climate and culture. But there is a "different-ness" that managers like Benitez and Wenger have that ruffles some sort of feathers. Fergie is lovably British, Ol' 'Arry has endless anecdotes, and there's a familiarity with O'Neill that's comforting. That doesn't really exist with Benitez, and when it comes along with a failure to win league, a lack of positive results, occasional lapses in tactics or performances, it's almost hard not to find fault.
nate: I think you hit the nail on the head with the line: "Decades of success combined with pomp and no follow-through makes for an easy target, and while the Houllier and Benitez years have been a stark shift from those days, I think there's a residual resentment that could only be refuted with a championship." It's something I should have been clearer about in the last section. Liverpool are an easy target for mutually dependent reasons: one, because the club used to win titles religiously, and two, because they haven't won the league in going on two decades. It's not quite pre-2004 Red Sox, but there are parallels.
And simply having Benitez as manager increases that pressure because of the reasons we've elucidated. He's not a media darling, nor is he eminently quotable, and that he's a foreign manager feeds into some of the British media's stereotypes. I like that you compared Benitez to Wenger; the two managers have been defending the other in public recently, both before and after the Liverpool/Arsenal match. Both foreign managers, both under increasing pressure to end the trophy drought. Football makes strange bedfellows.
You say that there have been few memorable press conferences, but since when are press conferences supposed to be memorable? To continue with American sports references, they can't all be Jim Mora's "PLAYOFFS???!?!" The sole purpose is to feed the beast prior to kickoff. And maybe that's the problem. Mourinho fed the beast. Ferguson, when he's not avoiding post-match interviews so he can start drinking sooner, feeds the beast. Redknapp assuredly feeds the beast, and with a lovable Cockney accent to boot. Benitez, on the other hand, wasn't fluent in English for the first few years and doesn't suffer fools. And when the beast isn't fed, it writes its own headlines. And we get to read about how Rafa ranted Liverpool out of the title race.
07 February 2010
On Rafa Benitez: Part IV
The continuing series between Ed from Liverpool Offside and I on Rafa Benitez's reign. Just three more parts to go (counting this one), which means there are probably less than 5000 words left to read. Cherish every single one of them.
Part IV: Transfers
Intro | Managerial Record | Tactics | Man Management
Ed: So after a relatively active January transfer window, and players traveling both ways, we have a more up-to-date picture of Rafa's transfer dealings with the club. You can't really have this type of discussion without mentioning finances, but I'd love to try, mostly because I'm not patient/intelligent enough to dig very deep into it. But it's also a slippery slope---you start with the "what if's" pertaining to financing for the transfer market, and next thing you know Liverpool have a four man midfield with everyone making £150,000 per week.
Plus, I don't really think he's done that poorly. In the past I've written some harsh things about Rafa in the transfer market, but on the whole it's not a complete disaster. High praise, I know, but there's been times when my frustration with things on the whole have bled into other areas, and it seems like the transfer dealings, for whatever reason, are an easy enough target. But given the funding he's had (first funding reference!), he's brought in a level of talent that's arguably comparable with the other big clubs.
So after looking for a source that had a list of the signings that wasn't nearly five screens long, I'm just highlighting some of the "bigger" signings since Benitez came to Liverpool. Granted, not entirely comprehensive, and missing some vital information about the funding (number two!), but still a decent list of who's come in:
2004: Josemi, Antonio Nunez, Xabi Alonso, Luis Garcia
2005: Fernando Morientes, Bolo Zenden, Scott Carson, Peter Crouch, Momo Sissoko, Mauricio Pellegrino, Pepe Reina
2006: Robbie Fowler, Mark Gonzalez, Jan Kromkamp, Fabio Aurelio, Gabriel Paletta, Daniel Agger, Dirk Kuyt, Nabil El Zhar, Craig Bellamy
2007: Fernando Torres, Alvaro Arbeloa, Dani Pacheco, Andriy Voronin, Sebastian Leto, Javier Mascherano, Jermaine Pennant, Yossi Benayoun, Lucas, Ryan Babel, Krisztian Nemeth, Damien Plessis, Mikel San Jose, Lauri Dalla Valle, Charles Itandje
2008: Martin Skrtel, Andrea Dossena, Phillipp Degen, David Ngog, Robbie Keane, Diego Cavalieri, Albert Riera
2009: Glen Johnson, Sotirios Kyrgiakos, Alberto Aquilani
2010: Maxi Rodriguez
Obviously some highs, some lows, and plenty in between.
Couple of questions---what do you make of the transfer business since Rafa's been with the club? And is it even possible to evaluate all of this given the backroom turmoil?
nate: Surprise, surprise, I think Benitez deserves more credit than he’s given in the transfer market, but I can’t argue that multiple players on your list aren’t “Liverpool quality.” It’s evident in how many are still with the club: none from 2004, one from 2005, and four from 2006. But starting in 2007, you can see Rafa’s side taking some shape, with 10 out of 15 (2007), 5 out of 7 (2008), and 3 out of 3 (2009) players still at Liverpool.
The axiom ‘Benitez has mostly succeeded with the bigger purchases, had decent success with mid-range buys, and has been hit-and-miss with free transfers and low-cost deals’ basically works. A breakdown of transfers you listed, but only counting players with at least one first XI start (no Pacheco, Nemeth, San Jose or Dalla Valle):
Big purchases (>£10m): Xabi Alonso, Torres, Mascherano, Babel, Keane, Johnson, and Aquilani
Mid-range (£3-10m): Luis Garcia, Morientes, Crouch, Sissoko, Reina, Agger, Kuyt, Bellamy, Pennant, Benayoun, Lucas, Skrtel, Dossena, Cavalieri, and Riera
Low-cost: (free-£3m): Josemi, Nunez, Zenden, Carson, Pellegrino, Fowler, Gonzalez, Kromkamp, Aurelio, Paletta, El Zhar, Arbeloa, Voronin, Leto, Plessis, Itandje, Degen, Ngog, Kyrgiakos, and Maxi
That’s seven “big” purchases, 15 “mid-range,” and 20 “low-cost” or free transfers. Five big and eight mid-range players are still with the club, while only seven of the low cost are (four of whom were signed within the last two seasons). The percentages are 71%, 53% and 35% respectively, and that’s probably an above-average record.
I’m fairly sure both Chelsea and United have purchased more than seven £10m+ players since summer 2004. Even if you buy the argument that Liverpool’s spent more than United recently (as Ferguson drunkenly claimed last season), Liverpool doesn’t have anywhere near the means to spend a combined £17m on the off-chance Tosic and Ljajic might one day become Premiership players, just as one example.
There’s no two ways about it – Liverpool are the poor relations in the “big four,” and it’s finally come to bear this season. The team needed a much greater overhaul when Rafa arrived than United or Arsenal thanks to their respective successes. Chelsea got their needed overhaul thanks to Roman’s millions, and have spent comparatively less in the last couple of seasons, although they can still pay £18m on the likes of Zhirkov (who’s started less games than Aquilani). It’s no surprise fourth place is under threat from the nouveau riche Manchester City and relatively free-spending Tottenham.
Two things have impressed me in Benitez’s dealings: a ruthlessness that Houllier desperately lacked if players aren’t working out and making money on players sold. You rarely saw a player leave after six months or a year under Houllier, but Benitez is never afraid to cut ties. And more often than not, Liverpool makes money when he sells players. Alonso, Crouch, Bellamy, Sissoko, Carson, Arbeloa, and Voronin – among others – all brought a profit.
Admittedly, Keane stands out like a sore thumb: the only out-and-out failure as big purchases go (Babel’s still here…). I still don’t know why Benitez bought him without a deal also in place for Barry. But even then, Liverpool only lost £3m or so. Spurs bought Keane back for £16m only to loan him to Celtic – for free – exactly a year later.
I wish Liverpool had more money, and I blame the fact Benitez doesn’t on the debt laden on the club by two lying owners who happen to share my nationality. Purse strings have clearly tightened since 2008, although the worldwide recession and subsequent inability to build the new stadium obviously factors into that.
But at least 15 clubs operate under similar financial restraints, and most have fewer resources than Liverpool. Of course, it’s little coincidence that coincides with Liverpool’s current league position.
Ed: Dividing the transfers up in that way (big, mid-range, low-cost) is something that makes a world of sense, but for whatever reason I wouldn't have ended up there in ten thousand words on my own. Either I haven't read it or you haven't shared it, but thinking about what Liverpool have bought in the transfer market, nothing could be closer to the truth. The only hiccup, as you mention, is Robbie Keane, and given recent events, his failure at Liverpool might not have had anything to do with Rafa.
Looking at the "mid-range" buys, I think you can make the argument that this is now "Liverpool quality," like it or not. Reina, Kuyt, Riera, Lucas, Agger, and Skrtel are all regular first-teamers, and rightly so, and of the mid-range buys that have departed, Garcia, Crouch, Sissoko, and Bellamy figured on a consistent basis during their time at the club, and made significant impacts in their own right. The only real gems in the "low-cost" bracket, at least proven, are Arbeloa and Aurelio, with Ngog, Kyrgiakos, and Degen recently coming good.
And the idea of Rafa's ruthlessness rings true. We discussed his tendency to stick with his plan tactically in a previous section, and the same works here. It was never clearer than with Keane---came in for big money, didn't perform, sold him 6 months after arriving. That takes cantaloupes. He's done it with players of every stripe---Peter Crouch, Craig Bellamy, Xabi Alonso, Jermaine Pennant. Granted, some have asked to leave, but I think Rafa could have had some flex if he wanted them to stay. You get the feeling that sentimentality doesn't have much bearing for Rafa in the transfer market, and it likely shouldn't.
I know in my initial piece I pleaded for the chance to avoid the "what-if" scenarios, but now I'm compelled to move in that direction. I know you can't go by rumors, because God knows there've been literally thousands of players linked with the club since Rafa arrived. But it is interesting to think about where and how Benitez could have done better given the circumstances.
Has he settled with the buys he's made? Even with those who have gone on to have success at the club, could he have done better? The simple answer is yes, every bought player would ideally succeed. But I think it's a much more interesting question to think about the constraints he's operated under, and how it affected the players he "chose" to purchase.
nate: The “what if” game will drive us crazy. We’ll never know for certain, but I’d hazard a guess you could make one hell of an XI from players who got away.
And nearly every "what if" player can’t be blamed on Benitez. Dani Alves? Made it as far as an airport runway before Sevilla hiked the price by £2m, £2m that Liverpool were unable to pay or Rick Parry dithered on. And we got a £6.7m Jermaine Pennant instead. David Villa or Silva? Nope, the owners are out of money. Wouldn’t pay the extra money Villa were demanding for Barry either.
And those are just three, three recent ones no less. Who knows how many more we never heard about or which went further than idle media speculation? Frankly, it’s best not thinking about it.
But Benitez didn’t “settle” for many of the mid-range buys you list as “Liverpool quality.” Kuyt, Lucas, Agger, Skrtel, Reina, Garcia, etc. were identified and – avoiding the usual debates over the first two named – have done well at the club.
The constraints Liverpool operate under – first under Moores and Parry, now under Statler and Waldorf – rule the day. As much as we’d like better players, Liverpool simply can't afford it. And given the needs from 2004 up until last year at best, Benitez had to buy quantity over quality to replace the deadwood in the squad and nonexistent Academy. And until that changes, we’ll continue to rue missed opportunities and debate "Liverpool quality.”
Part IV: Transfers
Intro | Managerial Record | Tactics | Man Management
Ed: So after a relatively active January transfer window, and players traveling both ways, we have a more up-to-date picture of Rafa's transfer dealings with the club. You can't really have this type of discussion without mentioning finances, but I'd love to try, mostly because I'm not patient/intelligent enough to dig very deep into it. But it's also a slippery slope---you start with the "what if's" pertaining to financing for the transfer market, and next thing you know Liverpool have a four man midfield with everyone making £150,000 per week.
Plus, I don't really think he's done that poorly. In the past I've written some harsh things about Rafa in the transfer market, but on the whole it's not a complete disaster. High praise, I know, but there's been times when my frustration with things on the whole have bled into other areas, and it seems like the transfer dealings, for whatever reason, are an easy enough target. But given the funding he's had (first funding reference!), he's brought in a level of talent that's arguably comparable with the other big clubs.
So after looking for a source that had a list of the signings that wasn't nearly five screens long, I'm just highlighting some of the "bigger" signings since Benitez came to Liverpool. Granted, not entirely comprehensive, and missing some vital information about the funding (number two!), but still a decent list of who's come in:
2004: Josemi, Antonio Nunez, Xabi Alonso, Luis Garcia
2005: Fernando Morientes, Bolo Zenden, Scott Carson, Peter Crouch, Momo Sissoko, Mauricio Pellegrino, Pepe Reina
2006: Robbie Fowler, Mark Gonzalez, Jan Kromkamp, Fabio Aurelio, Gabriel Paletta, Daniel Agger, Dirk Kuyt, Nabil El Zhar, Craig Bellamy
2007: Fernando Torres, Alvaro Arbeloa, Dani Pacheco, Andriy Voronin, Sebastian Leto, Javier Mascherano, Jermaine Pennant, Yossi Benayoun, Lucas, Ryan Babel, Krisztian Nemeth, Damien Plessis, Mikel San Jose, Lauri Dalla Valle, Charles Itandje
2008: Martin Skrtel, Andrea Dossena, Phillipp Degen, David Ngog, Robbie Keane, Diego Cavalieri, Albert Riera
2009: Glen Johnson, Sotirios Kyrgiakos, Alberto Aquilani
2010: Maxi Rodriguez
Obviously some highs, some lows, and plenty in between.
Couple of questions---what do you make of the transfer business since Rafa's been with the club? And is it even possible to evaluate all of this given the backroom turmoil?
nate: Surprise, surprise, I think Benitez deserves more credit than he’s given in the transfer market, but I can’t argue that multiple players on your list aren’t “Liverpool quality.” It’s evident in how many are still with the club: none from 2004, one from 2005, and four from 2006. But starting in 2007, you can see Rafa’s side taking some shape, with 10 out of 15 (2007), 5 out of 7 (2008), and 3 out of 3 (2009) players still at Liverpool.
The axiom ‘Benitez has mostly succeeded with the bigger purchases, had decent success with mid-range buys, and has been hit-and-miss with free transfers and low-cost deals’ basically works. A breakdown of transfers you listed, but only counting players with at least one first XI start (no Pacheco, Nemeth, San Jose or Dalla Valle):
Big purchases (>£10m): Xabi Alonso, Torres, Mascherano, Babel, Keane, Johnson, and Aquilani
Mid-range (£3-10m): Luis Garcia, Morientes, Crouch, Sissoko, Reina, Agger, Kuyt, Bellamy, Pennant, Benayoun, Lucas, Skrtel, Dossena, Cavalieri, and Riera
Low-cost: (free-£3m): Josemi, Nunez, Zenden, Carson, Pellegrino, Fowler, Gonzalez, Kromkamp, Aurelio, Paletta, El Zhar, Arbeloa, Voronin, Leto, Plessis, Itandje, Degen, Ngog, Kyrgiakos, and Maxi
That’s seven “big” purchases, 15 “mid-range,” and 20 “low-cost” or free transfers. Five big and eight mid-range players are still with the club, while only seven of the low cost are (four of whom were signed within the last two seasons). The percentages are 71%, 53% and 35% respectively, and that’s probably an above-average record.
I’m fairly sure both Chelsea and United have purchased more than seven £10m+ players since summer 2004. Even if you buy the argument that Liverpool’s spent more than United recently (as Ferguson drunkenly claimed last season), Liverpool doesn’t have anywhere near the means to spend a combined £17m on the off-chance Tosic and Ljajic might one day become Premiership players, just as one example.
There’s no two ways about it – Liverpool are the poor relations in the “big four,” and it’s finally come to bear this season. The team needed a much greater overhaul when Rafa arrived than United or Arsenal thanks to their respective successes. Chelsea got their needed overhaul thanks to Roman’s millions, and have spent comparatively less in the last couple of seasons, although they can still pay £18m on the likes of Zhirkov (who’s started less games than Aquilani). It’s no surprise fourth place is under threat from the nouveau riche Manchester City and relatively free-spending Tottenham.
Two things have impressed me in Benitez’s dealings: a ruthlessness that Houllier desperately lacked if players aren’t working out and making money on players sold. You rarely saw a player leave after six months or a year under Houllier, but Benitez is never afraid to cut ties. And more often than not, Liverpool makes money when he sells players. Alonso, Crouch, Bellamy, Sissoko, Carson, Arbeloa, and Voronin – among others – all brought a profit.
Admittedly, Keane stands out like a sore thumb: the only out-and-out failure as big purchases go (Babel’s still here…). I still don’t know why Benitez bought him without a deal also in place for Barry. But even then, Liverpool only lost £3m or so. Spurs bought Keane back for £16m only to loan him to Celtic – for free – exactly a year later.
I wish Liverpool had more money, and I blame the fact Benitez doesn’t on the debt laden on the club by two lying owners who happen to share my nationality. Purse strings have clearly tightened since 2008, although the worldwide recession and subsequent inability to build the new stadium obviously factors into that.
But at least 15 clubs operate under similar financial restraints, and most have fewer resources than Liverpool. Of course, it’s little coincidence that coincides with Liverpool’s current league position.
Ed: Dividing the transfers up in that way (big, mid-range, low-cost) is something that makes a world of sense, but for whatever reason I wouldn't have ended up there in ten thousand words on my own. Either I haven't read it or you haven't shared it, but thinking about what Liverpool have bought in the transfer market, nothing could be closer to the truth. The only hiccup, as you mention, is Robbie Keane, and given recent events, his failure at Liverpool might not have had anything to do with Rafa.
Looking at the "mid-range" buys, I think you can make the argument that this is now "Liverpool quality," like it or not. Reina, Kuyt, Riera, Lucas, Agger, and Skrtel are all regular first-teamers, and rightly so, and of the mid-range buys that have departed, Garcia, Crouch, Sissoko, and Bellamy figured on a consistent basis during their time at the club, and made significant impacts in their own right. The only real gems in the "low-cost" bracket, at least proven, are Arbeloa and Aurelio, with Ngog, Kyrgiakos, and Degen recently coming good.
And the idea of Rafa's ruthlessness rings true. We discussed his tendency to stick with his plan tactically in a previous section, and the same works here. It was never clearer than with Keane---came in for big money, didn't perform, sold him 6 months after arriving. That takes cantaloupes. He's done it with players of every stripe---Peter Crouch, Craig Bellamy, Xabi Alonso, Jermaine Pennant. Granted, some have asked to leave, but I think Rafa could have had some flex if he wanted them to stay. You get the feeling that sentimentality doesn't have much bearing for Rafa in the transfer market, and it likely shouldn't.
I know in my initial piece I pleaded for the chance to avoid the "what-if" scenarios, but now I'm compelled to move in that direction. I know you can't go by rumors, because God knows there've been literally thousands of players linked with the club since Rafa arrived. But it is interesting to think about where and how Benitez could have done better given the circumstances.
Has he settled with the buys he's made? Even with those who have gone on to have success at the club, could he have done better? The simple answer is yes, every bought player would ideally succeed. But I think it's a much more interesting question to think about the constraints he's operated under, and how it affected the players he "chose" to purchase.
nate: The “what if” game will drive us crazy. We’ll never know for certain, but I’d hazard a guess you could make one hell of an XI from players who got away.
And nearly every "what if" player can’t be blamed on Benitez. Dani Alves? Made it as far as an airport runway before Sevilla hiked the price by £2m, £2m that Liverpool were unable to pay or Rick Parry dithered on. And we got a £6.7m Jermaine Pennant instead. David Villa or Silva? Nope, the owners are out of money. Wouldn’t pay the extra money Villa were demanding for Barry either.
And those are just three, three recent ones no less. Who knows how many more we never heard about or which went further than idle media speculation? Frankly, it’s best not thinking about it.
But Benitez didn’t “settle” for many of the mid-range buys you list as “Liverpool quality.” Kuyt, Lucas, Agger, Skrtel, Reina, Garcia, etc. were identified and – avoiding the usual debates over the first two named – have done well at the club.
The constraints Liverpool operate under – first under Moores and Parry, now under Statler and Waldorf – rule the day. As much as we’d like better players, Liverpool simply can't afford it. And given the needs from 2004 up until last year at best, Benitez had to buy quantity over quality to replace the deadwood in the squad and nonexistent Academy. And until that changes, we’ll continue to rue missed opportunities and debate "Liverpool quality.”
01 February 2010
On Rafa Benitez: Part III
The continuing series between Ed from Liverpool Offside and I on Rafa Benitez's reign. Update: Fixed the links. I'm sorry; I'm a moron.
Part III: Man Management
Intro | Part I | Part II
nate: Before getting waist-deep in man management, I want to reply to a couple of the points about Gerrard you brought up in the last edition. Sadly, I think they can be addressed just as well here, although Saturday’s match against Bolton took some of the steam out of my complaints.
It’s not that Gerrard just hasn’t done it in the free role, with or without Torres. He hasn’t set the world afire from central midfield either; the early season victories over Hull and Burnley with Gerrard and Lucas “holding” in the 4-2-3-1 came at home with almost everyone fit. The last thing I want to do is scapegoat Steven Gerrard after all he’s done for this club – I’ve tried to make it clear I think it’s a club-wide chain reaction – but he is the captain and he sets the tone. And as you said, it’s inevitable given his CV.
He’s absolutely had a heavy weight on his shoulders, and it’s been both on and off the pitch. Not only has he faced increasing responsibility in light of departures and injuries while injured himself, but he’s the face of Liverpool’s failure to reclaim the league, almost 30 and seemingly no closer to the title. In a World Cup year. It’s obviously going to plague the player.
Gerrard’s relationship with Rafa has always been speculated upon. “Professional” seems the best, and nicest, way to describe it. More than most, it appears Gerrard needs to be encouraged when he’s struggling, and that’s evidently not Benitez’s style. Given his symbiotic relationship with the club, it’s little surprise the team as a whole suffers when Gerrard’s off-form and vice versa. But there’s also no arguing that Gerrard’s added more to his game since Benitez became manager.
Despite having Fabrice Muamba as a shadow on Saturday, he looked a lot better, both fitter and more interested. I know it’s one game; Bolton weren’t exceptionally imposing opposition, and knowing this season, it could be an illusion. But seeing improvement three days after Wolves leads me to think it’s more fitness than anything else, and that’d be a massive relief. Of course, I still worry.
Let me throw out a disclaimer now. I don’t pretend to have any insights into the Liverpool dressing room. I also don’t often believe those that don’t come from players, staff, or a few in the media with an actual knowledge of the team (read: Tony Barrett). So I’m frequently skeptical of claims that Rafa isn’t a good “man manager.” But it’s always been one of the sticks most frequently used to beat Benitez.
He’s cold. Dispassionate. Treats his players like chess pieces. Won’t throw an arm around the shoulder and have a cuddle like Harry Redknapp or jump up and down the touchline like Martin O’Neill.
Admittedly, Benitez could be closer with his players – although out of date at this point, Guillem Balague's "A Season on the Brink" (among other books/reports/interviews) demonstrates this – but that’s not necessarily a good thing. There’s a thin line between being a players’ manager and letting the inmates run the asylum, especially with the wages this generation’s on. At the same time, Benitez’s ability to “rally the troops,” a la Ferguson’s renowned hair dryer treatment or the way Arsenal was a completely different side in the second half at Anfield in October, is rightfully questioned.
But Liverpool’s certainly seen a few come-from-behind victories and backs-against-the-wall wins. And we’ve seen the likes of Carragher, Gerrard, Torres, Mascherano, Alonso, and Reina – among multiple others – improve under Rafa.
I think how players get on with Benitez says more about their character than his. Compare what players like Torres (cover article in this month’s FourFourTwo: 'How Rafa Made Me The Best In The World') and Reina say about him compared to Robbie Keane and Babel. Problem children like Jermaine Pennant haven’t flourished under him, yet Bellamy had nothing but nice things to say.
Alonso can’t be avoided when discussing Benitez’s man management. It was clear there was tension at the end, whether down to Rafa’s being angry that Xabi missed Inter for the birth of his first son or the attempted sale to Juventus or because of Gareth Barry. Alonso 'blamed' Barry a few weeks back, but I’m still suspicious. The merits of selling Alonso and/or buying Barry have been endlessly debated, but once Real made their intent known, Xabi wanted to leave. I doubt any relationship with the manager could have prevented it. Although maybe changing English tax laws could have.
So, while I've certainly wished Benitez was more of an imposing, pro-active, and reassuring manager when Liverpool's in situations like this season's sprung, I'm tempted to think he's undervalued in this regard (in every regard!), and part of it's down to media and public perception. The taciturn, unapproachable foreigner (taking over for Wenger), in comparison to Sir Alex, Happy Harry, or O'Neill (no clever nickname for him).
But I'm a relentless Benitez apologist. What do normal people actually think?
Ed: Sadly "normal" is not a concept that people are tripping over each other to apply to me.
Working through your first point, the Gerrard we saw against Bolton is the one I've been clamoring for--sort of a rudimentary way to describe it, but there was a friskiness to his play that we haven't witnessed in awhile. Pounced on loose balls, freed himself from some admirable marking by Muamba, and thrust a couple of shots goalwards that have been greatly missed. On at least two occasions, maybe more, a Gerrard effort was parried by Jaaskelainen and nearly led to a goal. Granted, Jaaskelainen isn't Iker Casillas or Gigi Buffon, but he's not exactly a mannequin. It's hard to say whether this performance was down to growing fitness, the presence of Aquilani to buttress the attack, or new found inspiration, but I know that I want more. Much, much more.
As it relates to Rafa, and it's kind of something you touch on, I think there's some sort of conflict about Gerrard's role as the "face" of the club. This is and has been Steven Gerrard's Liverpool, and will continue to be until he either retires or plies his trade overseas (there's no way he goes to another club in England at this point). It's never really been Rafa's club, despite his work to bring in players that will fit the system he wants to run. Taking Gerrard off for Lucas in the Merseyside derby was about as close as Rafa's come to asserting his clout when it comes to the captain. But I just don't believe that Gerrard is a prototypical "Benitez" player, which is to say that he's more action than he is cerebral, at least in terms of playing style. Maybe more comfortable playing unhinged and unencumbered by tactics or direction, and it just so happens that he's the hometown boy at his hometown club, fighting desperately to earn them the title they so desperately long for. Whether this is major conflict, minor conflict, or non-existent, we'll never know---as you mention, it's tough to have insight on the inner workings of the club. But it's sort of fun, isn't it?
But I do think it puts Benitez in a strange spot, because a passionate fight for a long-awaited title is not exactly how you would define Rafa's reign at Liverpool, even when they were racking up the points last season. It's almost as though his style of interaction with his players is entirely goal-focused, on both a micro (in-game) and macro (over the course of a season) level. You play football to win, this is how you go about it, little room for pomp or circumstance. There's a controlled nature to the tenure of Rafa Benitez, so much so that when you see bursts of hand movements or scuffles with other managers on the touchline that it's almost uncomfortable, placing you squarely in the throes of cognitive dissonance. What you know, or what you've been fed by the media, about the man does not play out before your eyes. But there's usually no smoke without fire.
You brought up some of the catch phrases that are most typically used to describe Benitez (e.g., "cold," "dispassionate"), and I think there's both truth and hyperbole in their use. For some reason I can't shake the picture of Benitez on the touchline during the penalty shootout against Chelsea in the 2007 Champions League semifinals. The entire Liverpool world was shaking, trembling, hoping, and waiting, and there sat Rafa Benitez, legs crossed, checking his watch as he so often does, shaking his coat sleeve off the watch face in an almost rehearsed manner. It was just so bizarrely methodical, although with hindsight it's about what you expect.
So how does this play out in the way he deals with his players? I think "professional," which you use to describe his relationship with Gerrard, is about as dead-on as it gets. He's not quite Robo-Cop, but he's not Uncle Rafa with the goofy stories, sneaking you beer after training and telling you stories about chasing ladies. There's such an upside/downside when you're dealing with human beings---some players absolutely require instruction in great detail, others find it an inconvenience. There's never really a "perfect" manager, and Rafa's no different. He clearly has a highly developed understanding of the game, its tactics, and the technical necessities of player performance.
I think it's why players like Torres, Reina, Insua, Mascherano and Gerrard have developed technically under Rafa. But it does also feel like there's something missing with Rafa, and maybe it's something the club needs more of. The word "chemistry" is overused in sports, but I think that might be as close as I can get to describing what's missing. Players can certainly create it between one another---among the departed, I think Arbeloa and Riise were fantastic in this sense. Reina's a constant here, and recently we've had Kyrgiakos setting a new tone, and Carra and Gerrard bear much of the responsibility for the club. But I think some of it needs to come from the top, and that's where Rafa might be falling a bit short.
I think the failings were clearest with Xabi Alonso, and here's where I think the "chess piece" metaphor might be apt. Rafa identified someone he wanted and went after him, perhaps without regard for the effect that it could have on what he currently had. It's as though the thought that it wouldn't work out never occurred to him. But we know that when it didn't, and if we take Xabi Alonso's word that it changed his mind, we witnessed a season-long 7.0 on the Simmons Vengeance Scale. If we get really wild with this idea, Rafa should have proposed a firesale in August of 2008 and Liverpool would have set a league record in points.
But Rafa's not an asshole, he's not a man to sell-out his players, and he's never going to make a show of imposing discipline or order. The latter likely occurs behind-the-scenes, while the former two likely never occur. I think that's why players like Craig Bellamy have nice things to say after leaving, it's why players sing his praises about the improvements they've made, and why it's tough to get too high on anti-Rafa emotions. It's almost like the approach he espouses bleeds into the perception I have---I shouldn't jump to conclusions with him, because that would be out of control, and the last thing I want to do is be out of control.
So all of this is a long way of saying that I think Rafa will never be short of finding technical justification for the way he handles his players, but it's not just a case of having empirical evidence, or the footballing equivalent, as grounding for dealing with human beings. Football's much more complex than that, and I think this year has provided plenty of evidence for that.
nate: Chemistry’s the most intangible of intangibles, and while the manager sets the tone and the environment, it’s more down to the players to actually get along. This is where I fear Gerrard fails as a captain, even if his other qualities often override that.
It’s always about striking the balance between the intellectual and the instinctive. As fans, we want to see blood and guts, Gerry Byrne breaking his collarbone in the 3rd minute of the FA Cup final. It’s why rampaging Gerrard is the icon that he is.
But Liverpool will never rely on the instinctive under Benitez. It’s just not his character. And I often see that cold, dispassionate strategizing as a positive. Penalties against Chelsea were the perfect example. Seeing Benitez cool enough to invoke Buddha on the touchline was massively reassuring. You knew Liverpool were going to win with Rafa that confident. But I derive pleasure from every goal where Benitez just shrugs and looks at his watch, whereas grown children like Ferguson and O’Neill jump up and down the touchline like they’ve won the lottery. Different strokes for different folks.
There are positives and negatives with each manager. When things are this tough, the grass will always be greener on the neighbor’s lawn. It’d be nice to see Benitez publicly rally the troops and the media, but it’s not the way he manages.
But, I still think the positives outweigh the negatives, and I’m still incredibly skeptical of the media’s ‘Benitez has no personality and no one likes him in the dressing room’ narrative.
Part III: Man Management
Intro | Part I | Part II
nate: Before getting waist-deep in man management, I want to reply to a couple of the points about Gerrard you brought up in the last edition. Sadly, I think they can be addressed just as well here, although Saturday’s match against Bolton took some of the steam out of my complaints.
It’s not that Gerrard just hasn’t done it in the free role, with or without Torres. He hasn’t set the world afire from central midfield either; the early season victories over Hull and Burnley with Gerrard and Lucas “holding” in the 4-2-3-1 came at home with almost everyone fit. The last thing I want to do is scapegoat Steven Gerrard after all he’s done for this club – I’ve tried to make it clear I think it’s a club-wide chain reaction – but he is the captain and he sets the tone. And as you said, it’s inevitable given his CV.
He’s absolutely had a heavy weight on his shoulders, and it’s been both on and off the pitch. Not only has he faced increasing responsibility in light of departures and injuries while injured himself, but he’s the face of Liverpool’s failure to reclaim the league, almost 30 and seemingly no closer to the title. In a World Cup year. It’s obviously going to plague the player.
Gerrard’s relationship with Rafa has always been speculated upon. “Professional” seems the best, and nicest, way to describe it. More than most, it appears Gerrard needs to be encouraged when he’s struggling, and that’s evidently not Benitez’s style. Given his symbiotic relationship with the club, it’s little surprise the team as a whole suffers when Gerrard’s off-form and vice versa. But there’s also no arguing that Gerrard’s added more to his game since Benitez became manager.
Despite having Fabrice Muamba as a shadow on Saturday, he looked a lot better, both fitter and more interested. I know it’s one game; Bolton weren’t exceptionally imposing opposition, and knowing this season, it could be an illusion. But seeing improvement three days after Wolves leads me to think it’s more fitness than anything else, and that’d be a massive relief. Of course, I still worry.
Let me throw out a disclaimer now. I don’t pretend to have any insights into the Liverpool dressing room. I also don’t often believe those that don’t come from players, staff, or a few in the media with an actual knowledge of the team (read: Tony Barrett). So I’m frequently skeptical of claims that Rafa isn’t a good “man manager.” But it’s always been one of the sticks most frequently used to beat Benitez.
He’s cold. Dispassionate. Treats his players like chess pieces. Won’t throw an arm around the shoulder and have a cuddle like Harry Redknapp or jump up and down the touchline like Martin O’Neill.
Admittedly, Benitez could be closer with his players – although out of date at this point, Guillem Balague's "A Season on the Brink" (among other books/reports/interviews) demonstrates this – but that’s not necessarily a good thing. There’s a thin line between being a players’ manager and letting the inmates run the asylum, especially with the wages this generation’s on. At the same time, Benitez’s ability to “rally the troops,” a la Ferguson’s renowned hair dryer treatment or the way Arsenal was a completely different side in the second half at Anfield in October, is rightfully questioned.
But Liverpool’s certainly seen a few come-from-behind victories and backs-against-the-wall wins. And we’ve seen the likes of Carragher, Gerrard, Torres, Mascherano, Alonso, and Reina – among multiple others – improve under Rafa.
I think how players get on with Benitez says more about their character than his. Compare what players like Torres (cover article in this month’s FourFourTwo: 'How Rafa Made Me The Best In The World') and Reina say about him compared to Robbie Keane and Babel. Problem children like Jermaine Pennant haven’t flourished under him, yet Bellamy had nothing but nice things to say.
Alonso can’t be avoided when discussing Benitez’s man management. It was clear there was tension at the end, whether down to Rafa’s being angry that Xabi missed Inter for the birth of his first son or the attempted sale to Juventus or because of Gareth Barry. Alonso 'blamed' Barry a few weeks back, but I’m still suspicious. The merits of selling Alonso and/or buying Barry have been endlessly debated, but once Real made their intent known, Xabi wanted to leave. I doubt any relationship with the manager could have prevented it. Although maybe changing English tax laws could have.
So, while I've certainly wished Benitez was more of an imposing, pro-active, and reassuring manager when Liverpool's in situations like this season's sprung, I'm tempted to think he's undervalued in this regard (in every regard!), and part of it's down to media and public perception. The taciturn, unapproachable foreigner (taking over for Wenger), in comparison to Sir Alex, Happy Harry, or O'Neill (no clever nickname for him).
But I'm a relentless Benitez apologist. What do normal people actually think?
Ed: Sadly "normal" is not a concept that people are tripping over each other to apply to me.
Working through your first point, the Gerrard we saw against Bolton is the one I've been clamoring for--sort of a rudimentary way to describe it, but there was a friskiness to his play that we haven't witnessed in awhile. Pounced on loose balls, freed himself from some admirable marking by Muamba, and thrust a couple of shots goalwards that have been greatly missed. On at least two occasions, maybe more, a Gerrard effort was parried by Jaaskelainen and nearly led to a goal. Granted, Jaaskelainen isn't Iker Casillas or Gigi Buffon, but he's not exactly a mannequin. It's hard to say whether this performance was down to growing fitness, the presence of Aquilani to buttress the attack, or new found inspiration, but I know that I want more. Much, much more.
As it relates to Rafa, and it's kind of something you touch on, I think there's some sort of conflict about Gerrard's role as the "face" of the club. This is and has been Steven Gerrard's Liverpool, and will continue to be until he either retires or plies his trade overseas (there's no way he goes to another club in England at this point). It's never really been Rafa's club, despite his work to bring in players that will fit the system he wants to run. Taking Gerrard off for Lucas in the Merseyside derby was about as close as Rafa's come to asserting his clout when it comes to the captain. But I just don't believe that Gerrard is a prototypical "Benitez" player, which is to say that he's more action than he is cerebral, at least in terms of playing style. Maybe more comfortable playing unhinged and unencumbered by tactics or direction, and it just so happens that he's the hometown boy at his hometown club, fighting desperately to earn them the title they so desperately long for. Whether this is major conflict, minor conflict, or non-existent, we'll never know---as you mention, it's tough to have insight on the inner workings of the club. But it's sort of fun, isn't it?
But I do think it puts Benitez in a strange spot, because a passionate fight for a long-awaited title is not exactly how you would define Rafa's reign at Liverpool, even when they were racking up the points last season. It's almost as though his style of interaction with his players is entirely goal-focused, on both a micro (in-game) and macro (over the course of a season) level. You play football to win, this is how you go about it, little room for pomp or circumstance. There's a controlled nature to the tenure of Rafa Benitez, so much so that when you see bursts of hand movements or scuffles with other managers on the touchline that it's almost uncomfortable, placing you squarely in the throes of cognitive dissonance. What you know, or what you've been fed by the media, about the man does not play out before your eyes. But there's usually no smoke without fire.
You brought up some of the catch phrases that are most typically used to describe Benitez (e.g., "cold," "dispassionate"), and I think there's both truth and hyperbole in their use. For some reason I can't shake the picture of Benitez on the touchline during the penalty shootout against Chelsea in the 2007 Champions League semifinals. The entire Liverpool world was shaking, trembling, hoping, and waiting, and there sat Rafa Benitez, legs crossed, checking his watch as he so often does, shaking his coat sleeve off the watch face in an almost rehearsed manner. It was just so bizarrely methodical, although with hindsight it's about what you expect.
So how does this play out in the way he deals with his players? I think "professional," which you use to describe his relationship with Gerrard, is about as dead-on as it gets. He's not quite Robo-Cop, but he's not Uncle Rafa with the goofy stories, sneaking you beer after training and telling you stories about chasing ladies. There's such an upside/downside when you're dealing with human beings---some players absolutely require instruction in great detail, others find it an inconvenience. There's never really a "perfect" manager, and Rafa's no different. He clearly has a highly developed understanding of the game, its tactics, and the technical necessities of player performance.
I think it's why players like Torres, Reina, Insua, Mascherano and Gerrard have developed technically under Rafa. But it does also feel like there's something missing with Rafa, and maybe it's something the club needs more of. The word "chemistry" is overused in sports, but I think that might be as close as I can get to describing what's missing. Players can certainly create it between one another---among the departed, I think Arbeloa and Riise were fantastic in this sense. Reina's a constant here, and recently we've had Kyrgiakos setting a new tone, and Carra and Gerrard bear much of the responsibility for the club. But I think some of it needs to come from the top, and that's where Rafa might be falling a bit short.
I think the failings were clearest with Xabi Alonso, and here's where I think the "chess piece" metaphor might be apt. Rafa identified someone he wanted and went after him, perhaps without regard for the effect that it could have on what he currently had. It's as though the thought that it wouldn't work out never occurred to him. But we know that when it didn't, and if we take Xabi Alonso's word that it changed his mind, we witnessed a season-long 7.0 on the Simmons Vengeance Scale. If we get really wild with this idea, Rafa should have proposed a firesale in August of 2008 and Liverpool would have set a league record in points.
But Rafa's not an asshole, he's not a man to sell-out his players, and he's never going to make a show of imposing discipline or order. The latter likely occurs behind-the-scenes, while the former two likely never occur. I think that's why players like Craig Bellamy have nice things to say after leaving, it's why players sing his praises about the improvements they've made, and why it's tough to get too high on anti-Rafa emotions. It's almost like the approach he espouses bleeds into the perception I have---I shouldn't jump to conclusions with him, because that would be out of control, and the last thing I want to do is be out of control.
So all of this is a long way of saying that I think Rafa will never be short of finding technical justification for the way he handles his players, but it's not just a case of having empirical evidence, or the footballing equivalent, as grounding for dealing with human beings. Football's much more complex than that, and I think this year has provided plenty of evidence for that.
nate: Chemistry’s the most intangible of intangibles, and while the manager sets the tone and the environment, it’s more down to the players to actually get along. This is where I fear Gerrard fails as a captain, even if his other qualities often override that.
It’s always about striking the balance between the intellectual and the instinctive. As fans, we want to see blood and guts, Gerry Byrne breaking his collarbone in the 3rd minute of the FA Cup final. It’s why rampaging Gerrard is the icon that he is.
But Liverpool will never rely on the instinctive under Benitez. It’s just not his character. And I often see that cold, dispassionate strategizing as a positive. Penalties against Chelsea were the perfect example. Seeing Benitez cool enough to invoke Buddha on the touchline was massively reassuring. You knew Liverpool were going to win with Rafa that confident. But I derive pleasure from every goal where Benitez just shrugs and looks at his watch, whereas grown children like Ferguson and O’Neill jump up and down the touchline like they’ve won the lottery. Different strokes for different folks.
There are positives and negatives with each manager. When things are this tough, the grass will always be greener on the neighbor’s lawn. It’d be nice to see Benitez publicly rally the troops and the media, but it’s not the way he manages.
But, I still think the positives outweigh the negatives, and I’m still incredibly skeptical of the media’s ‘Benitez has no personality and no one likes him in the dressing room’ narrative.
27 January 2010
On Rafa Benitez: Part II
Part II: Tactics
Intro | Part I
**Disclaimer: Partly written before Wolves, partly written after, so pieces have been edited/chopped/added as we both saw fit. Yeah, sadly, it was one of those matches that actually somewhat changed my opinion. And not in a good way.**
Ed: First I had this ode to Rafa's tactical genius prepared, then a condemnation after sticking with the 4-2-3-1 and failing, and after the match against Spurs I'm struggling to make sense of it all. But after the match against Wolves I'm back to condemnation, and it's looking more and more like that's where I truly stand. Just a shocking performance from top to bottom, really. It perfectly epitomized what I've hated about this season--strange starting eleven for the opposition they were facing, strange execution of whatever tactics Rafa had prepared, and even stranger choices (or lack thereof) regarding the substitutions.
Looking back at this season, and yesterday in particular, I wonder if tactically he hasn't been as sharp, or if it's down to the players. And not necessarily unsound tactically, but unwilling to adapt to the personnel that he's got, or use that personnel in a way that gives Liverpool their best chance at winning.
So my previous thoughts: We all know the famed magician in Europe that is Rafa Benitez--the one that tactically dominates teams like Real Madrid (-.5 for Juande Ramos in charge), that creates goals out of nothing on the counter, that employed a system that others could only hope to emulate (and did at times, even against Liverpool). With the right personnel, and the right opposition, Rafa's skill as a tactician is widely regarded as one of the best in Europe.
Domestically, though, it seems like he's always just a tick off, as you mentioned in the last part. This season in particular, his preferred 4-2-3-1 has stalled greatly at times. He appeared to finally be hitting his stride with a preferred eleven in 2008-2009, and all the characters were perfectly placed. This season has seen a bit of a rupture in that regard--either teams have figured it out, injuries have dramatically reduced its effectiveness, or some combination of the two. Other teams seemed to have figured out what to do with Torres, how to stifle Gerrard, and where the team is vulnerable.
I think a large shortcoming of Rafa's, and something I've mentioned in the past, is his unwillingness to adapt. This coming a little more than two years after he rotated the squad in 100 straight matches. Against Stoke and Spurs he cut Ngog and Kuyt, respectively, loose up front, and I'm thinking that neither has the skill to be the lone man up front. But then Kuyt hits two against Spurs and all is right in the world. And then Gerrard comes back to face Wolves, Lucas and Masch partner in central midfield, we get the wide pairing of Riera and Maxi, and everything goes to shit. Except Pepe Reina, of course, who should just be given player of the season right now.
So when it comes to Rafa as a tactician, what's the story? Is his stubbornness worthwhile, or completely misguided? And how do Liverpool compensate when it's getting shut down, or is it a matter of just willing it to work, as it did against Spurs, but failed so miserably against Wolves?
nate: I can understand Wolves reviving your disgust. It essentially necessitated scrapping much of what I’d written for this section. And I don’t do that lightly – if anything, I’ve tried to stay constant in my convictions and realistic about expectations, desires, and results. But I’ve rarely been more frustrated or confused with Benitez.
You summed it up adequately: “Strange starting eleven for the opposition they were facing, strange execution of whatever tactics Rafa had prepared, and even stranger choices (or lack thereof) regarding the substitutions.”
The tactics seemed fairly clear, if disheartening. “Don’t concede, and hope for the best otherwise,” which takes us back a few years. But that’s the state of the club at the moment. And the line-up wasn’t a sea change from Spurs, but it still was. That’s the difference Gerrard makes, and unfortunately, it’s a negative difference right now. And I’m stunned to be writing that sentence.
Benitez has been questioned and criticized for his stubbornness, but I’m wondering where the manager who replaced Gerrard with Lucas in a Merseyside derby went, a match where the substitution earned the victory. Yesterday, we saw Gerrard return to the line-up sooner than expected and what little momentum Liverpool had built up dissipated. It weakened the side, endangered the captain’s fitness, and fed into the notion that Liverpool’s wholly reliant on him. It disrupts the whole notion of “team.” That’s not the Benitez I know. Not by a long shot.
As with almost everything this season, I’m not sure how much blame Benitez deserves. I understand most decisions and see how his hand’s been forced in others, but some, like yesterday’s (starting Gerrard and only Ngog as a sub), have baffled. After that abomination, I speculated (emphasis on speculated) that Gerrard basically demanded to start against Wolves, but unless there are unknown forces on Benitez, the manager still has the power to refuse his captain.
Originally, I was planning on defending the 4-2-3-1, and still somewhat want to. Liverpool only started using it regularly in February 2008, and it resulted in a fairly successful 18 months, mainly because it got the best out of Gerrard and Torres. That Benitez focused on buying wingbacks (Johnson, Dossena, Degen) – which is where the width inherently comes from in this formation – seemed to show Liverpool concretely heading in that direction (no, I don’t understand why Keane was bought either).
I want to see consistency. I want to see Benitez choose his strongest formation and stick with it. Rafa used to be criticized for basing his tactics on the opposition instead of Liverpool’s strengths, which worked great in Europe, but not the Premiership. The 4-2-3-1 was working, and I was glad Benitez became more rigid in this regard. I even wanted to see the reserve and youth teams playing the formation for experience. Better that Liverpool sets the tone rather than their opponents.
But it's often failed this season. And, whether it’s out of blind loyalty or idiocy, I still think a perfect storm of maladies is the cause. Alonso’s departure, a lack of funds seemingly requiring a cut-price injured Aquilani as his replacement, early defensive struggles leading to a change in tactics, a succession of injuries to crucial players, and finally, the real ‘bad luck' like ignored penalties and beach ball goals.
Teams saw Liverpool’s defensive liabilities in the first few games and started attacking with more regularity. That led to Johnson and Insua sitting deeper by the end of September; it’s little coincidence Johnson looked his best in the first few games. And that left the wingers – usually Kuyt and Benayoun – ‘stranded,’ often too narrow without overlapping support and without the likes of Alonso, who could change the direction of play in an instant with a 60-yard cross-field ball. But add a fit and happy Gerrard, or a fit Torres, and maybe that talent alone compensates for the other issues.
Yesterday saw further culmination of Liverpool’s death by a thousand cuts. The makeshift defense, comprised of Carragher-Skrtel-Kyrgiakos-Insua, has sat deeper in the last three games in an attempt to cut out the stupid goals while coping with injuries. It’s led to more defensive stability, which would be three successive clean sheets were it not for a late set-play goal at Stoke, but less attacking prowess. Liverpool survived Spurs by getting a much-needed early goal, aided by being at Anfield, and almost survived Stoke after going ahead. Unfortunately, it didn’t work yesterday, with a disconnected attack in a hostile environment further isolated by the gap between defense and midfield, leading to all those lovely hoofs, and not helped by the captain’s performance .
So, does Benitez need to be more or less stubborn? I still don’t know. As with someone who’s smarter than me, I don’t understand some of his decisions when they work, let alone when they don’t.
Consistency is almost always a good thing. I honestly don’t think changing the formation does much with the state the team’s in, both because of injuries and morale. I’m more than willing to admit the 4-2-3-1 looks 10,000 times better with Torres in the line-up, especially with Kuyt as the primary back-up, but I don’t see a switch to two up top accomplishing much.
I realize that “stay the course” sounds like such bad advice when the ship’s taking on so much water, but it’s what I’ve come to, at least tactically. Even after yesterday’s insipid performance. But man management and morale are different questions entirely.
Ed: You're right to call out my disgust with yesterday--if I didn't use that word, I should have. And you likely have a much calmer temperament than I, because "frustrated" and "confused" were many miles in the rear-view mirror for me when the final whistle blew. But I've resurfaced a little calmer and a little kinder, although still not completely certain that yesterday was a step in any identifiable direction.
I've started to almost zone out the pro-Rafa talk, not because I'm vehemently anti-Rafa, but only because so much of it sounds like mindless quotations of club slogans----"YNWA," "In Rafa We Trust"----and a whole lot of self-convincing. But you make a different case, and it's one that is certainly valid. I'm with you on the defensive issues, and it makes sense that in this formation, without wing backs to support the wide men, the attack is going nowhere. And the concept that consistency and stability in formation and approach is important is an easy one for me to grasp. Despite my desire for things to change, if there going to be identity development with this side, it needs stability. Maybe just not the unfortunate type of stability we've seen this season.
There's no disputing that prior to this season, Rafa's tactical skill has been spot on. The confluence of injury, finance, and bad luck, as you mention, clearly have a hand in the failures of this campaign. But I also think that the 4-2-3-1 has become a pitfall of sorts, particularly for Steven Gerrard.
The captain certainly had a season worthy of accolades last year, and it was the first time under Benitez that Gerrard seemed to have a cemented place. And despite the assurance that this was "his role," he had the freedom to operate as he saw fit. The partnership between he and Torres thrived (when both were fit), as we saw in the later stages of the 2007-2008 campaign and for most of 2008-2009 (again hampered by injuries).
But this season it's been something else entirely--and again, injuries play a large part. But it's almost as though having "the Gerrard role" has completed zapped the captain of his creativity and influence. It's no longer the incisive runs and clever, free-flowing interplays. As usual, the injury card needs to be played. But everything goes through him in attack--he knows it, his teammates know it, and the opposition knows it. It worked last year because he had a player in support to distribute, but with the departure of Alonso, and a central midfield pairing of two distribution-stunted defensive mids, now he's tasked with forcing the attack, distributing the ball, being creative, and operating anywhere and everywhere to compensate.
And it's failed miserably. As you say, who knows what happens with a healthy Gerrard and Torres? But we do know that a partially fit Steven Gerrard has had a hell of a time matching what he's been able to do in the past. Maybe unfair to hold him to that standard, but with the litany of heroics and spontaneous ecstasy he's provided, it's inevitable. Yet again, the pressure's on him to produce--and not in an Olympiakos, Istanbul, FA Cup Final v. West Ham, even 2008-2009 season type of way--in a way that's part of a system now designed around his ability to fulfill the role he's created.
Wrapping it up, I think the part that originally resonated most with me was the idea of having this formation/approach be standard across first team, reserves, etc. In a way this gives the team some identity, which I think has been a struggle, this year in particular. Certainly a side wants to be known for more than what formation they play, but it would start to develop some coherence across the club's different levels. Ideally it would lead to more vertical opportunities for some of the younger talent and give the reserves an idea of what to expect should they break through.
For all intents and purposes, it looks like staying the course is going to occur, as you say. It is the hand the club has been dealt (at least with injuries), so we can just hope that we continue to see the type of determination we witnessed against Spurs and Stoke. Although I do worry that we can only see so many "anomalies" before the aforementioned displays actually become the exception. Dramatic, maybe, but tough to shake that thought.
nate: Your point on Gerrard shouldering too much responsibility, both on and off the pitch, is absolutely spot on. And, sadly, I think it’s one that just as well addressed under “man management.” So if it’s alright with you, I think we’ll lead off with that topic in the next section.
Intro | Part I
**Disclaimer: Partly written before Wolves, partly written after, so pieces have been edited/chopped/added as we both saw fit. Yeah, sadly, it was one of those matches that actually somewhat changed my opinion. And not in a good way.**
Ed: First I had this ode to Rafa's tactical genius prepared, then a condemnation after sticking with the 4-2-3-1 and failing, and after the match against Spurs I'm struggling to make sense of it all. But after the match against Wolves I'm back to condemnation, and it's looking more and more like that's where I truly stand. Just a shocking performance from top to bottom, really. It perfectly epitomized what I've hated about this season--strange starting eleven for the opposition they were facing, strange execution of whatever tactics Rafa had prepared, and even stranger choices (or lack thereof) regarding the substitutions.
Looking back at this season, and yesterday in particular, I wonder if tactically he hasn't been as sharp, or if it's down to the players. And not necessarily unsound tactically, but unwilling to adapt to the personnel that he's got, or use that personnel in a way that gives Liverpool their best chance at winning.
So my previous thoughts: We all know the famed magician in Europe that is Rafa Benitez--the one that tactically dominates teams like Real Madrid (-.5 for Juande Ramos in charge), that creates goals out of nothing on the counter, that employed a system that others could only hope to emulate (and did at times, even against Liverpool). With the right personnel, and the right opposition, Rafa's skill as a tactician is widely regarded as one of the best in Europe.
Domestically, though, it seems like he's always just a tick off, as you mentioned in the last part. This season in particular, his preferred 4-2-3-1 has stalled greatly at times. He appeared to finally be hitting his stride with a preferred eleven in 2008-2009, and all the characters were perfectly placed. This season has seen a bit of a rupture in that regard--either teams have figured it out, injuries have dramatically reduced its effectiveness, or some combination of the two. Other teams seemed to have figured out what to do with Torres, how to stifle Gerrard, and where the team is vulnerable.
I think a large shortcoming of Rafa's, and something I've mentioned in the past, is his unwillingness to adapt. This coming a little more than two years after he rotated the squad in 100 straight matches. Against Stoke and Spurs he cut Ngog and Kuyt, respectively, loose up front, and I'm thinking that neither has the skill to be the lone man up front. But then Kuyt hits two against Spurs and all is right in the world. And then Gerrard comes back to face Wolves, Lucas and Masch partner in central midfield, we get the wide pairing of Riera and Maxi, and everything goes to shit. Except Pepe Reina, of course, who should just be given player of the season right now.
So when it comes to Rafa as a tactician, what's the story? Is his stubbornness worthwhile, or completely misguided? And how do Liverpool compensate when it's getting shut down, or is it a matter of just willing it to work, as it did against Spurs, but failed so miserably against Wolves?
nate: I can understand Wolves reviving your disgust. It essentially necessitated scrapping much of what I’d written for this section. And I don’t do that lightly – if anything, I’ve tried to stay constant in my convictions and realistic about expectations, desires, and results. But I’ve rarely been more frustrated or confused with Benitez.
You summed it up adequately: “Strange starting eleven for the opposition they were facing, strange execution of whatever tactics Rafa had prepared, and even stranger choices (or lack thereof) regarding the substitutions.”
The tactics seemed fairly clear, if disheartening. “Don’t concede, and hope for the best otherwise,” which takes us back a few years. But that’s the state of the club at the moment. And the line-up wasn’t a sea change from Spurs, but it still was. That’s the difference Gerrard makes, and unfortunately, it’s a negative difference right now. And I’m stunned to be writing that sentence.
Benitez has been questioned and criticized for his stubbornness, but I’m wondering where the manager who replaced Gerrard with Lucas in a Merseyside derby went, a match where the substitution earned the victory. Yesterday, we saw Gerrard return to the line-up sooner than expected and what little momentum Liverpool had built up dissipated. It weakened the side, endangered the captain’s fitness, and fed into the notion that Liverpool’s wholly reliant on him. It disrupts the whole notion of “team.” That’s not the Benitez I know. Not by a long shot.
As with almost everything this season, I’m not sure how much blame Benitez deserves. I understand most decisions and see how his hand’s been forced in others, but some, like yesterday’s (starting Gerrard and only Ngog as a sub), have baffled. After that abomination, I speculated (emphasis on speculated) that Gerrard basically demanded to start against Wolves, but unless there are unknown forces on Benitez, the manager still has the power to refuse his captain.
Originally, I was planning on defending the 4-2-3-1, and still somewhat want to. Liverpool only started using it regularly in February 2008, and it resulted in a fairly successful 18 months, mainly because it got the best out of Gerrard and Torres. That Benitez focused on buying wingbacks (Johnson, Dossena, Degen) – which is where the width inherently comes from in this formation – seemed to show Liverpool concretely heading in that direction (no, I don’t understand why Keane was bought either).
I want to see consistency. I want to see Benitez choose his strongest formation and stick with it. Rafa used to be criticized for basing his tactics on the opposition instead of Liverpool’s strengths, which worked great in Europe, but not the Premiership. The 4-2-3-1 was working, and I was glad Benitez became more rigid in this regard. I even wanted to see the reserve and youth teams playing the formation for experience. Better that Liverpool sets the tone rather than their opponents.
But it's often failed this season. And, whether it’s out of blind loyalty or idiocy, I still think a perfect storm of maladies is the cause. Alonso’s departure, a lack of funds seemingly requiring a cut-price injured Aquilani as his replacement, early defensive struggles leading to a change in tactics, a succession of injuries to crucial players, and finally, the real ‘bad luck' like ignored penalties and beach ball goals.
Teams saw Liverpool’s defensive liabilities in the first few games and started attacking with more regularity. That led to Johnson and Insua sitting deeper by the end of September; it’s little coincidence Johnson looked his best in the first few games. And that left the wingers – usually Kuyt and Benayoun – ‘stranded,’ often too narrow without overlapping support and without the likes of Alonso, who could change the direction of play in an instant with a 60-yard cross-field ball. But add a fit and happy Gerrard, or a fit Torres, and maybe that talent alone compensates for the other issues.
Yesterday saw further culmination of Liverpool’s death by a thousand cuts. The makeshift defense, comprised of Carragher-Skrtel-Kyrgiakos-Insua, has sat deeper in the last three games in an attempt to cut out the stupid goals while coping with injuries. It’s led to more defensive stability, which would be three successive clean sheets were it not for a late set-play goal at Stoke, but less attacking prowess. Liverpool survived Spurs by getting a much-needed early goal, aided by being at Anfield, and almost survived Stoke after going ahead. Unfortunately, it didn’t work yesterday, with a disconnected attack in a hostile environment further isolated by the gap between defense and midfield, leading to all those lovely hoofs, and not helped by the captain’s performance .
So, does Benitez need to be more or less stubborn? I still don’t know. As with someone who’s smarter than me, I don’t understand some of his decisions when they work, let alone when they don’t.
Consistency is almost always a good thing. I honestly don’t think changing the formation does much with the state the team’s in, both because of injuries and morale. I’m more than willing to admit the 4-2-3-1 looks 10,000 times better with Torres in the line-up, especially with Kuyt as the primary back-up, but I don’t see a switch to two up top accomplishing much.
I realize that “stay the course” sounds like such bad advice when the ship’s taking on so much water, but it’s what I’ve come to, at least tactically. Even after yesterday’s insipid performance. But man management and morale are different questions entirely.
Ed: You're right to call out my disgust with yesterday--if I didn't use that word, I should have. And you likely have a much calmer temperament than I, because "frustrated" and "confused" were many miles in the rear-view mirror for me when the final whistle blew. But I've resurfaced a little calmer and a little kinder, although still not completely certain that yesterday was a step in any identifiable direction.
I've started to almost zone out the pro-Rafa talk, not because I'm vehemently anti-Rafa, but only because so much of it sounds like mindless quotations of club slogans----"YNWA," "In Rafa We Trust"----and a whole lot of self-convincing. But you make a different case, and it's one that is certainly valid. I'm with you on the defensive issues, and it makes sense that in this formation, without wing backs to support the wide men, the attack is going nowhere. And the concept that consistency and stability in formation and approach is important is an easy one for me to grasp. Despite my desire for things to change, if there going to be identity development with this side, it needs stability. Maybe just not the unfortunate type of stability we've seen this season.
There's no disputing that prior to this season, Rafa's tactical skill has been spot on. The confluence of injury, finance, and bad luck, as you mention, clearly have a hand in the failures of this campaign. But I also think that the 4-2-3-1 has become a pitfall of sorts, particularly for Steven Gerrard.
The captain certainly had a season worthy of accolades last year, and it was the first time under Benitez that Gerrard seemed to have a cemented place. And despite the assurance that this was "his role," he had the freedom to operate as he saw fit. The partnership between he and Torres thrived (when both were fit), as we saw in the later stages of the 2007-2008 campaign and for most of 2008-2009 (again hampered by injuries).
But this season it's been something else entirely--and again, injuries play a large part. But it's almost as though having "the Gerrard role" has completed zapped the captain of his creativity and influence. It's no longer the incisive runs and clever, free-flowing interplays. As usual, the injury card needs to be played. But everything goes through him in attack--he knows it, his teammates know it, and the opposition knows it. It worked last year because he had a player in support to distribute, but with the departure of Alonso, and a central midfield pairing of two distribution-stunted defensive mids, now he's tasked with forcing the attack, distributing the ball, being creative, and operating anywhere and everywhere to compensate.
And it's failed miserably. As you say, who knows what happens with a healthy Gerrard and Torres? But we do know that a partially fit Steven Gerrard has had a hell of a time matching what he's been able to do in the past. Maybe unfair to hold him to that standard, but with the litany of heroics and spontaneous ecstasy he's provided, it's inevitable. Yet again, the pressure's on him to produce--and not in an Olympiakos, Istanbul, FA Cup Final v. West Ham, even 2008-2009 season type of way--in a way that's part of a system now designed around his ability to fulfill the role he's created.
Wrapping it up, I think the part that originally resonated most with me was the idea of having this formation/approach be standard across first team, reserves, etc. In a way this gives the team some identity, which I think has been a struggle, this year in particular. Certainly a side wants to be known for more than what formation they play, but it would start to develop some coherence across the club's different levels. Ideally it would lead to more vertical opportunities for some of the younger talent and give the reserves an idea of what to expect should they break through.
For all intents and purposes, it looks like staying the course is going to occur, as you say. It is the hand the club has been dealt (at least with injuries), so we can just hope that we continue to see the type of determination we witnessed against Spurs and Stoke. Although I do worry that we can only see so many "anomalies" before the aforementioned displays actually become the exception. Dramatic, maybe, but tough to shake that thought.
nate: Your point on Gerrard shouldering too much responsibility, both on and off the pitch, is absolutely spot on. And, sadly, I think it’s one that just as well addressed under “man management.” So if it’s alright with you, I think we’ll lead off with that topic in the next section.
22 January 2010
On Rafa Benitez: Q&A with Liverpool Offside
Editor’s Note: Ed from Liverpool Offside and I exchange emails about Rafa Benitez in an attempt to come to some sort of conclusion about his time at Liverpool. The posts will appear both here and at Liverpool Offside. Today we’re running Ed’s intro and our opening statements. I apologize in advance for my overwrought "biography," most of which regular readers already know. Part I will probably be up tomorrow, as there's no Liverpool game until Tuesday.
I also feel as if I should note that both the Intro and Part I were mostly written before Wednesday's win over Spurs. Not that the match changed either of our views, but worth a disclaimer. Anyway, much of the credit goes to Ed for setting this whole thing up, and on with his intro.
The ongoing soap opera of Liverpool F.C. has obviously hit a fever pitch. No less than ten different columns a day are devoted to the managerial post at Liverpool, and most of it focuses on the current inhabitant, Rafa Benitez. The recent results for the club have seemed to only polarize opinions further, with those who back him through thick and thin only strengthening their support, and those calling for his head only getting louder. Both sides focus on some common factors--management of his players, dealings in the transfer market, record as a manager, and the like.
As someone who admittedly waffles in his opinions about Rafa, I thought it would be useful to try to take a step back and see where the evidence lies. I figured a task like this is one better done with company, so I floated an email to nate to see if he wanted to be involved. If you haven't found your way over to oh you beauty, do so immediately, as nate has managed to maintain some of the highest quality stuff about Liverpool on the internet for three and a half years now.
I mentioned to nate that I'd like this to be a Simmons/Gladwellian email exchange evaluating Rafa's time with the club, and fortunately for me he agreed. We decided to focus on a few specific areas in the exchanges, but also allowed for some tangential discussion about other issues related to the club. Our six main focal points:
I. Record as a Manager
II. Tactical Acumen
III. In the Transfer Market
IV. Man Management
V. Handling the Press
VI. Plans for the Future
So that's the framework, which will unfold over multiple posts depending on length. We'll just run them on both sites when we feel that they're completed enough, or if I've been drinking and hit "Publish" instead of "Save." Before we get going, I asked nate to provide a brief bio about himself, his history as a Liverpool fan, and how he got going on oh you beauty. I also provide a bit on myself, since I may be new to some of nate's readers and never really introduced myself on here.
nate: Ed gives me far too much credit. For those that don't know, I'm nate (yes, I'm one of those odd people who don't see the point in capitalizing names, a habit I've kept up since those august angsty teen days), and I write oh you beauty. I'm probably best known as a Benitez, Kuyt, and Lucas apologist, which isn't easy going these days. I swear, following Liverpool is probably the only part of my life where I'm an optimist, and it's become almost impossible this season.
I'm just a fan on the wrong side of the ocean who started writing out of love of the team, sport, and, well, writing. I'm a nerd, and my deep and dirty secret is I became a Liverpool fan at the age of 15 because of that Judas traitor Michael Owen. An Anglophile as long as I've known the meaning of the word, soccer was one of two sports I've played my entire life, and I've followed the English national team since Italia '90, a sadly formative moment in my childhood. When Owen, not much older than me, burst onto the international stage at the same time I was becoming intimately familiar with the internet (and could afford to purchase videos and DVDs from abroad), I starting following Liverpool. It may not have been the team's halcyon days, but I didn't know it at the time. Increasing stateside soccer coverage made the support turn into an obsession, and the more I followed the team, the less I cared about individual players like Owen (even though the second thing I did upon landing in England when I studied abroad was buy an Owen jersey, which I still have). Thankfully, the obsession became something positive when I began the blog in September 2006, basically because I needed a distraction from a boring job and a bad relationship.
But enough about me. You're here for the football.
Ed: And to learn more about me, clearly. You've seen me on the Liverpool Offside for the last half of last season (starting here), and starting up again in September (here).
My interest in football started unofficially as a six year-old, when I led my U6 team in goals and yellow cards. I played off and on for years after that, then was sufficiently Americanized and played baseball through high school and college. I picked up proper football again through the FIFA series on in the later part of the '90s and early '00s, followed the 2002 World Cup regularly, and really caught fire in 2006. I admittedly knew little of Liverpool, or club football for that matter, but I'd seen highlights of the FA Cup Final prior to the World Cup in Germany and marveled at the passion. I caught damn near every match of the World Cup that summer, researched Liverpool exhaustively, and hit the ground running with the club in August of that year. Steven Gerrard, Robbie Fowler, and Ian Rush highlight videos were my gateway, but similarly to nate, following the team consistently pushed me past the individuals and into the club.
With introductions settled, we're going to launch into the exchanges. If you have any questions, comments, or feedback, please feel free to comment at one of our sites. This will be an ongoing thing, so there's room for us to revisit certain questions or comments. On the horizon, I. Record as a Manager
I also feel as if I should note that both the Intro and Part I were mostly written before Wednesday's win over Spurs. Not that the match changed either of our views, but worth a disclaimer. Anyway, much of the credit goes to Ed for setting this whole thing up, and on with his intro.
The ongoing soap opera of Liverpool F.C. has obviously hit a fever pitch. No less than ten different columns a day are devoted to the managerial post at Liverpool, and most of it focuses on the current inhabitant, Rafa Benitez. The recent results for the club have seemed to only polarize opinions further, with those who back him through thick and thin only strengthening their support, and those calling for his head only getting louder. Both sides focus on some common factors--management of his players, dealings in the transfer market, record as a manager, and the like.
As someone who admittedly waffles in his opinions about Rafa, I thought it would be useful to try to take a step back and see where the evidence lies. I figured a task like this is one better done with company, so I floated an email to nate to see if he wanted to be involved. If you haven't found your way over to oh you beauty, do so immediately, as nate has managed to maintain some of the highest quality stuff about Liverpool on the internet for three and a half years now.
I mentioned to nate that I'd like this to be a Simmons/Gladwellian email exchange evaluating Rafa's time with the club, and fortunately for me he agreed. We decided to focus on a few specific areas in the exchanges, but also allowed for some tangential discussion about other issues related to the club. Our six main focal points:
I. Record as a Manager
II. Tactical Acumen
III. In the Transfer Market
IV. Man Management
V. Handling the Press
VI. Plans for the Future
So that's the framework, which will unfold over multiple posts depending on length. We'll just run them on both sites when we feel that they're completed enough, or if I've been drinking and hit "Publish" instead of "Save." Before we get going, I asked nate to provide a brief bio about himself, his history as a Liverpool fan, and how he got going on oh you beauty. I also provide a bit on myself, since I may be new to some of nate's readers and never really introduced myself on here.
nate: Ed gives me far too much credit. For those that don't know, I'm nate (yes, I'm one of those odd people who don't see the point in capitalizing names, a habit I've kept up since those august angsty teen days), and I write oh you beauty. I'm probably best known as a Benitez, Kuyt, and Lucas apologist, which isn't easy going these days. I swear, following Liverpool is probably the only part of my life where I'm an optimist, and it's become almost impossible this season.
I'm just a fan on the wrong side of the ocean who started writing out of love of the team, sport, and, well, writing. I'm a nerd, and my deep and dirty secret is I became a Liverpool fan at the age of 15 because of that Judas traitor Michael Owen. An Anglophile as long as I've known the meaning of the word, soccer was one of two sports I've played my entire life, and I've followed the English national team since Italia '90, a sadly formative moment in my childhood. When Owen, not much older than me, burst onto the international stage at the same time I was becoming intimately familiar with the internet (and could afford to purchase videos and DVDs from abroad), I starting following Liverpool. It may not have been the team's halcyon days, but I didn't know it at the time. Increasing stateside soccer coverage made the support turn into an obsession, and the more I followed the team, the less I cared about individual players like Owen (even though the second thing I did upon landing in England when I studied abroad was buy an Owen jersey, which I still have). Thankfully, the obsession became something positive when I began the blog in September 2006, basically because I needed a distraction from a boring job and a bad relationship.
But enough about me. You're here for the football.
Ed: And to learn more about me, clearly. You've seen me on the Liverpool Offside for the last half of last season (starting here), and starting up again in September (here).
My interest in football started unofficially as a six year-old, when I led my U6 team in goals and yellow cards. I played off and on for years after that, then was sufficiently Americanized and played baseball through high school and college. I picked up proper football again through the FIFA series on in the later part of the '90s and early '00s, followed the 2002 World Cup regularly, and really caught fire in 2006. I admittedly knew little of Liverpool, or club football for that matter, but I'd seen highlights of the FA Cup Final prior to the World Cup in Germany and marveled at the passion. I caught damn near every match of the World Cup that summer, researched Liverpool exhaustively, and hit the ground running with the club in August of that year. Steven Gerrard, Robbie Fowler, and Ian Rush highlight videos were my gateway, but similarly to nate, following the team consistently pushed me past the individuals and into the club.
With introductions settled, we're going to launch into the exchanges. If you have any questions, comments, or feedback, please feel free to comment at one of our sites. This will be an ongoing thing, so there's room for us to revisit certain questions or comments. On the horizon, I. Record as a Manager
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)