With Kenny bringing through a new type of attacking football to the club, my question is - do we need a Left back AND a Left winger? Ideally I'd like to have both, if not just for the squad, but is it really necessary? Johnson is a case in point, we haven't had proper out and out wingers in a long while, but at RB he will always bomb up the wing in a RWB fashion. My point is - would we not be better buying a very attacking LWB who can also track fairly well, in the mould of Dani Alves and trying to play the wing football that Barcelona play? When we played Chelsea this season under Kenny, we deployed the 3-5-2 tactic, and we beat Chelsea comfortably despite the players never playing that formation before. He put in a RWB and LWB to cover wing duties both defensively and offensively and I think they did a good job. Now with the introduction of Suarez who usually likes to cut in from the left, I can't see another Left winger being introduced just to crowd up the left hand side. If we were to play 3-5-2 and use an attacking LWB - we would have roughly 3 different wide depths. -------------Reina-------------- ------CB-----CB-----CB-------- --RWB-------------------LWB--- -------CM------------CM------- -------------CAM--------------- -------FWD-------FWD---------- This could be equally changed, by instead of having the CAM, playing a CDM between the wing backs. Considering that the left would probably look like this: -------Attacking LWB--- ----LCM--------------- -------Suarez----------- Why would a LW be any use? Anyway, my question is - would you prefer a defensive LB and an attacking LW, or pay that bit of extra money and buy a top notch attacking LWB?
Kelly----Carra---Agger----Johnson --------Lucas-Aquilani Henderson-Gerrard-Suarez -----------Carroll I'm happy as is to be honest
Personally I think we play better with 3 CBs. I'd go with: ---------------------Reina------------------ ------Carragher-----Ayala------Agger-------- --Kelly---------------------------------LWB--- -----------Lucas----------Aquilani------- ------------------Gerrard--------------- ------------Carroll-------Suarez----------
at the end of the day I'll take a class player or prospect at any position. It increases your options.
To be fair we played 3-5-2 for most of the end of the season and it worked. It would also explain why we have 75 central midfielders. -------------------Reina--------------------- -------Carra-------Skertle--------Agger------ Johnson--------------------------------Aurellio type -----------Lucas------Merielles/Aquaman----- -------------------Gerrard-------------------- -----------------Suarez----Caroll-------------
I don't know about a 3-5-2 formation, did work last season but the wing backs will have alot of running to do, can be exhausting week in, week out. 4-2-3-1 seems good and fits well, Suarez is great on the left and Carroll would be really effective as a lone striker. Also, Lucas who has performed above expectation still gets to play along with Gerrard and Henderson. Aquilani can play the deep lying playmaker role and it could prove to be really effective.
The problem is we won't play 3 5 2 every game. We won't need 3 CBs against the lesser teams who we need to attack rather than contain. Having a winger, even if on the bench, means you have the option to change it up accordingly. Or even towards the end of a match if we need a goal.
I don't think we'd use it every match but I think you've got that backwards about when to use it. 3-5-2 would be against weaker teams as you get an extra attacking player with three at the back and expose yourself defensively.
Well we played 3 5 2 (actually, it's 5 3 2, with wing backs being defenders technically) against Chelsea and Stoke who we expected would put pressure on us defensively. 4 3 3 or 4 5 1 would be a more attacking formation. You'd have 6 players responsible for attacking, where 5 3 2 has 5 players responsible for attacking, with 2 wing backs mixing between the two. Anyway, point is, we do need a winger or two so we can change it up. Sticking to one formation will make is easier for teams to prepare for us.
Fair enough. But do you agree when I say we need a (left) winger in order to change the formation when needed?
I think Suarez is a brilliant left winger. The best in the league. And I'm more than happy with Johnson at left back. I think he's even better there than on the right. We need another wide player though. If it's a left sided player then I'd move Suarez to the right and drop (or limit appearances) Kuyt.
Downing (and I'm just using him because of the strong links) can play either side if needed. Maybe that's our thinking when identifying targets for that area, someone who can be a traditional winger as well as play in other attacking positions if need be.
Although Downing doesn't have the big name, I was thinking the same. You get a lot of options and he can score as well as play as a traditional chalk on boots winger.
I feel like we've had this for years. We all say we need a winger all season as we fail to stretch teams, then as time goes on and we haven't signed one in the transfer window we all convince ourselves we never needed one in the first place. Previously we've been encouraged to think we didn't need one simply because we didn't have the money, or weren't willing to invest it, so it would stop us causing a fuss in the transfer window or criticising what was probably Benitez' worst position for signings. Everyone at Liverpool has gotten into this habit of denial! We've just paid £35mil for a guy that his former coach (the increasingly nuts Kevin Keegan) has said is the best header of a ball he's ever seen and who is practically unplayable in the air. Let's be nice to ourselves and get someone who can beat his man and get the crosses in at least as a consistent option, even if half the time we play a fluid formation/pass and move/inverted wingers or whatever we decide. All of the teams above us have someone who threatens from the wings and gets the crosses in, and i think that's why they have dropped less points against the so-called 'lesser teams'. The one time it has clicked for us in the same way was Riera in the team that ran a close 2nd, and he's hardly a world beater but it made a difference. Like your analysis Ze, only disagree partly since i think we would choose a versatile winger and play like you say a large amount of the time!
@Skrtels Nips but Suarez is the best winger in the league and from what I hear Henderson is great crossing from the right. Not to mention Kelly can get forward and cross very well as can Johnson. And I'd much rather keep the ball on the ground whenever possible. It's how proper teams play football.
Never trusted the 3 at the back system (5 with the wing backs) as I always felt you need centre halfs who were brought up playing this system rather than asking the likes of Carra and Skrts to adapt to it but time will tell what KD is planning I guess. As for the wingers I personally think we absolutely do need natural width it's something we've missed for years. Look at the best League winning teams from the past thirty years and the vast majority have had very good "line huggers" supplying the forward line....it`s no coincidence that MAF always has at least 3 wide players in his squads that can stretch defences. Plus, as stated above, the addition of Carroll to our squad will seem like a total waste of time if we don't have decent deliveries coming in from wide areas (as opposed to sticking it onto his noggin from 80 yards away).
Okay just to clear something up people.. I am in no way saying we don't need width, but if you look at the wide system employed by Barcelona - the most crosses are provided by their fullbacks, they're the ones that run the wings. I'm under the opinion we need a very attacking class LWB that might cost a bit, as opposed to a defensive LB and attacking LW that take up 2 spots in the team.
