Hello lads,
I have been pondering the striker situation at Liverpool. Now we have two recognised senior strikers, with Morgan included that is 3. This may worry one or two or more of you but I implore you not to worry. We know that the plan was to bring in another striker, probably Sturridge or Dempsey but the fact that we don't have one shouldn't be too much cause for concern.
I'd ask you to cast your minds back to EURO 2012. The champions were Spain, who started all but one or two games without a striker on the pitch. Not just this, they weren't even playing any out and out wingers, not until Navas came on. The front three was Iniesta (CM), Fabregas (CM) and Silva (CAM). Obviously those three are quality players but none natural finishers. While their top scorer was Torres, an out of form striker who was hardly played in the big games by Chelsea the season before the tournament. His ability to finish can be compared to Suarez or Borini. Goals that season at least.
Spain relied on team work and movement to create chances. Not on a poacher, not on a forward. Liverpool this year are playing with three men up front, a 4-3-3. We have 7 players capable of filling any one of those three spots naturally. That is 2 for each position with one left over. That one could be Morgan. I think if asked, Gerrard could easily play in the front three, as Fabregas did. He has enough experience in the game to adapt slightly more forward.
Obviously having another recognised striker in the team would make us fans relax a bit more, but I don't think it is serious problem. Once we learn to work the ball into dangerous areas, patiently and in numbers we will have no problem scoring goals.
So my message is... don't worry about the lack of striker, Spain didn't need one, we don't need one. We are the greatest team in the world after all .
The Striker Situation
posted on 11/9/12
^ Kemlyn youve made it angry
Chickpea dont be upset ...
posted on 11/9/12
He isn't comparing the quality, just the system you fool. I see your stance against the club has brought massive dividends.
Your club is actually a joke and a blip in the history of football in this country.
Very few fans of any team would have been upset to see you relegated, barely worth mentioning in fact.
posted on 11/9/12
I’d rather stand up for my club and fight tooth and nail every day of the year than be like Liverpool or United
====================================================
Excellent rant...did you just lay an egg?
Actually, Hodgson didn't get all that much abuse, certainly not of the rabid-chicken kind which led one Premiership manager to walk out of your stadium in disgust.
We sang "Hodgson for England", though, and lo and behold, he got the job, so everyone was happy (especially England fans).
PS. I know it's wasted on you to make a rational point . chick-pea, but the OP only made a tactical comparison to the way Spain play, he did not suggest we were as good, so the clucking-frenzy it provoked from you was a bit random.
posted on 11/9/12
The gaps between our defence, midfield and forwards are too big to play like Spain.
Once we get closer together on the pitch and play more as a team instead of 3 phases. We'll get better
posted on 11/9/12
Chickpea .... Genius
posted on 11/9/12
Guys...Now i know that SAF is not tactically the best manager out there.
But still, he knows that the one area where a team cannot be weak in is Strikers(unless u r Barca/Spain).
All top teams have top strikers for a reason.
U may see that some of the top teams have weak defense(Arsenal/Milan) and some have weak midfield(Utd/Chelsea) but strikers is one area all teams/clubs consider as the most important one.
The issue is that without a good striker u need to play every game to the top of ur ability to make sure u have enough control/possession to create chances for midfielders to take them.
But if u have a top striker, u can afford to have a weak midfield as long as they create enough chances for the striker to take and score.
I think BR is a very astute coach, but i m sure even he is not satisfied with the striker situation at ur club.
posted on 11/9/12
but i m sure even he is not satisfied with the striker situation at ur club.
============================================
I think that's the nub. Those people defending it are overlooking the likelihood that BR's not happy about it himself.
posted on 11/9/12
I think that's the nub. Those people defending it are overlooking the likelihood that BR's not happy about it himself.
-------------
Amen to that.
There have been quite a few posts on here expressing how loaning out Carroll and not even replacing him can be interpreted as a good thing.
With no goals from open play and a packed fixture list, a lack of attacking options just isn't a postive.
posted on 11/9/12
comedy!!
posted on 11/9/12
Yea I know Rodgers wants more strikers, he even said that himself. But I was trying to illustrate that it can be done without an abundance of strikers.
Rovers or whatever it was, as other commenters have pointed out, I was comparing the system not the players. I was suggesting Gerrard could play the same role not be as good as.
I am sure the next player to join the club will be a striker, I as only trying to ease any worry through the illustration of the Spanish.
Also Lucas Vida - exactly!! The gaps between phases and players are too wide! When I watched Spain, on the attack there entire team bar the GK was on the screen. The furthest forward and back were within 40 yards of each other at most for the vast majority of build up play. Football is really a very simple game, it is just over complicated through impatient tactics and when certain players forget it's a team game.
And Transalpinotrails - - also true. Gerrard isn't used to the system and has very rarely relied on team mates to get the ball forward. He needs to take a step back and allow others to excel because his strengths aren't the systems strengths.