Is Brendan Rodgers going to take us forward???

Still not agreeing with the stat though. It still comes down to opinion on what is classed as clear cut and not. A chance that is clear cut to one player isn't to another either; right or left footed for example. And yes, every player should be able to use both feet but the reality is, modern day professionals in general can't.

 

But how do we know Ings suits our style of play? Burnley play nothing like us. People said the same about Lallana but even he doesn't - we play quick attacking football (well at least we did) - Lallana is slow on the ball and slows down the attack.

The only reason people say that he and Ings suit our style of play is because they work hard and press. That's the only reason.

 

He has pace so can make runs in behind players rather than coming short for the ball and getting in the way of courinho like balotelli and if he does go out wide like Lambert seems to have an obsession with, he at least has a bit of pace and skill to do something with it when he gets there.

Yes hea he's not going to score is 30 goals a season (yet anyway) but if he gets close to 10 he'd have out scored all our forwards form this year.

 

Hard working, pressing, versatility and pace is Brod's philosophy

 

I think stats can play a part but on forums like this, they're mostly used to bamboozle the opposition. I guess a clear cut chance [ask Jimmy] is defined by 'should score'. If the same criteria is used for every team and it's the same person or group of people viewing every match with an unbiased eye and making the decision, then the amount per team should be fair so if it's deemed we had 37 and Southampton had 39, I can't argue with that.

You probably know quite firmly what you would consider a clear cut chance, if you're undecided then it's not clear cut, it speaks for itself. If you can apply that without bias to any team, then if nothing else, it's a good measure of who's actually creating chances and the conversion % should point to the highest scoring. best placed teams and when it doesn't that's when the dodgiest defences are exposed - as in the stat I posted.

 

But this is just making assumptions. There is no evidence he would suit our play - he may have certain attributes but that does not mean you can put him into this LFC (which plays completely differently to Burnley) and expect him to suit us.

Borini has the same attributes - he scored 10 goals last season as well. But you wouldn't say Borini was able to adapt to our style of play.

The same applies to Milner - people are expecting him to come straight into CM based on performances over 5 years ago at Villa. Where is the evidence he can perform at a big club like Man City, week in week out? There is none.

 

It still depends on the player. The keeper may be on the edge of the eighteen yard box leaving an open goal and you're about thirty-five yards out and have two defenders to beat. Shooting from where you stand would be considered a clear cut chances for someone like Gerrard, or Studge but what about if Skrtel or Carragher had been the player in possession? IMO, a clear cut chance is not a universal fact, its an opinion.

 

I never said Ings would suit our play or not, I just stated what Brod's philosophy is

I actually think Ings would be a good impact sub, better than Mario, Rickie or Fabio. But equally, I don't like signing players purely as back-up either. I'd prefer us to sign two quality striker and let them along with Studge fight it out. Sell the rest.

 

That was more for IBWT.

The point is, it just feels that if you're hard working and run around a lot, you instantly fit our style - which is a lazy assumption.

 

Just had a look, opta definition of a big chance [what they call clear cut chance] : “A situation where a player should reasonably be expected to score usually in a one-on-one scenario or from very close range.”

 

Last season, we were creating 3-4 CCC's every game. Our attack was world class.

I know we're not scoring many this season but the problem isn't simply down to not having a striker. The attackers aren't creating enough also.

This stems from Rodgers's tactics - he's tried to overcompensate for the defence. And having a non-existent defence and midfield, means that the attackers have to drop deeper to get the ball or to help out defensively.

The poor defence and midfield is down to personnel.

The poor attack is systemic.

 

When you have the likes of Suarez and Sturridge at their best working together, reading each other, causing mayhem in defences with their movement, then it's easier for others to create those CCC. Still comes down a lot to your strikers imo.

 

Simple answer to OP is no. Get a better manager in.

 

Definitely helps, but Suarez is a unique player. He alone created chances, but more importantly, he created space for others.

 

I agree. The best strikers create their own chances, had we had one this season I'm sure we would be at least one place higher up in the league

 

They dont have to be as good as Suarez. I think with the way Rodgers likes Liverpool to play any quality CF will be effective. Sanchez isnt as good but he'd be as effective. Lets see how Origi does.

 

Rodgers betrayed his vision last season by season players that did not fit his style. Though it seems the commitee is to lame for Balotelli.

But this season should also have shown the committee that any players signed must fit Rodgers vision.

 

Rodgers did the right thing last season to his credit - and that was playing to Suarez's strengths and building the team around him.

This season, he's tried to impose his own system but it simply does not suit the players at his disposal.

Since the Sterling news broke, Ben Smith from the BBC also mentioned that Sterling has fallen out with Rodgers along with others. If this is the case, then I think Rodgers has to go. Difficult to win back the dressing room.

 

There is no reason to keep Rodgers at all, he has to go

 

I'm curious now - is there actually any reason to keep Rodgers other than a) we don't want to pay out compensation or b) lack of credible replacements?