Jump to content
IGNORED

Liverpool Football Club Thread

glb

By glb
in Sport

 Share

Recommended Posts

dogsout

dogsout

Posted
Posted

Just the usual daft expectations. We didn't bring a 'proven winner' in like René Meulensteen or Pako (like he'd want to be a number two just as his own management career is taking off). O'Driscoll's teams play a very similar style to Rodgers'. It seems like it could be a good fit to me, which is obviously more important than a big name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dogsout

dogsout

Posted
Posted

Well, quite. It's not as if any of us could have any real inkling of what the departed Pascoe's strengths or weaknesses are, so it's not something that we, as fans, can objectively judge. Like most things in football, then. Even so, at least in O'Driscoll's case, he has a fairly long history in coaching/management and it's not too difficult to find footage of some of his teams, and there are many similarities in terms of style between his football and Brendan's. Obviously I'm just guessing here but I kind of get the impression that this appointment is about Brendan relinquishing some of the responsibility a bit. Like, he's bringing in someone he trusts to help coach the team because he can't do it all on his own. You know, the way a number two is supposed to work rather than just putting the cones out and being good for a laugh.

Our inability to remain compact and organised in midfield is something I've complained about many times under Rodgers. One thing I'll say about O'Driscoll's u19 side is they're compact and press very well. They play a very high line as well, which is something we've struggled to maintain in many games under Rodgers - it's not been our default approach by any means but in many of the games where we've tried it, we've been undone through a combination of a lack of organisation and quite cowardly decision-making from certain players.

I think there's enough to go on to at least get an inkling that their philosophies are broadly similar and he might be able to help Rodgers polish up some of the rougher parts of our game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
glb

glb

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Pascoe's strengths were putting cones out for the team, even when it was freezing. And he had dreamy legs.

As dogsout says, he comes with a similar style of play so should integrate nicely, and at least has an entire pre-season to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Istanbul

Istanbul

Posted
Posted

Just the usual daft expectations. We didn't bring a 'proven winner' in like René Meulensteen or Pako (like he'd want to be a number two just as his own management career is taking off). O'Driscoll's teams play a very similar style to Rodgers'. It seems like it could be a good fit to me, which is obviously more important than a big name.

Strange though...we got rid of Pascoe and Marsh citing the need for more experience and we've gone and appointed the U16 coach (as highly rated as he is) and a guy who had trudged around the English lower leagues getting sacked nearly everywhere he has been, with no experience of the Premier League or foreign stars (for the most part).

I just hope this isn't a 'matey' appointment from Rodgers, because that is what it feels like to many fans this morning. It's great for coaches and managers to have the same philosophy, but it can be limiting if another approach is sometimes needed. We don't need more 'yes men'. More so, I hope he can set up a defence and sort out positioning on set pieces...because seemingly nobody at the club was able to do that in the last 2 seasons.

Having said all that, there have been plenty of absolutely brilliant number twos who have been terrible managers, so it might work out yet.

2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dogsout

dogsout

Posted
Posted

I'd argue that if a new approach is needed, it's the manager that we should be looking to replace first and foremost - the number two isn't there to provide a different approach to what the manager wants.

It's not as simple as bringing in someone who can 'set up a defence', unless they're capable of setting up a defence that will flourish within the manager's system. As I hinted at in my previous post, I've been pissing and moaning about the distance between the lines at times under Rodgers. This was a problem for us even at our best under him, but we were just so prolific that it masked it. I don't believe the defence is leaky because we have shit defenders, or they're not coached properly on how to defend. I'm not sure how many of you are joyless enough to spend your free time reading and learning about coaching or even actually coaching, but I've done a bit and there are fundamental, basic things that are not being carried out properly.

I maintain that our biggest problem under Brendan has been the midfield, and this has been consistent throughout his time here. The distance between the midfield and the defence has been too vast, too often. Our defenders are left in 1v1 situations too frequently because of this distance. It hinders our ability to pass out of the back as well because, bar a few exceptional combinations in transition (Sakho to Phil, for example), the defender is under too much pressure to play the perfect pass, and/or the midfielder is in too congested an area to receive said pass safely. Rodgers has tried to circumvent this problem by moving towards a midfield pivot and split CBs (this is also a feature of O'Driscoll's u19s, by the way), and it worked for a while during the season before last, but it's still an issue.

What I'm saying is I think it's important that the new number two understands what Rodgers is aiming for, and is able to help the team reach that aim. That doesn't mean he'd be a 'yes man', and it would be a lot more productive than bringing in somebody who has a completely different objective in terms of the manner in which he expects a team to defend. O'Driscoll might be able to offer solutions to some of these problems without wanting or expecting to make wholesale changes to the entire framework of Rodgers' tactical philosophy.

2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Istanbul

Istanbul

Posted
Posted

Yes and no, I think you need an assistant on the same wave length but has the opposite qualities in terms of the manager's strengths and weaknesses as to provide different solutions and ideas. Whether O'Driscoll is that man, I'm not sure. Everything I see seems to suggest he is extremely similar to Rodgers. Whatever Rodgers (and his team) have been doing in terms of setting up the entire team as a defensive unit when needed - hasn't worked at all. True, we've had good results, but we've never looked solid. It is definitely the system, I totally agree, and not the players. I think the vast majority of people would say that. So, I do think it's something that needs to be looked at extensively...and if O'Driscoll is coming in to further instill the will of the manager, seeing that he shares the same philosophy, then I worry we're not going to get our defensive problems sorted anytime soon. Instead, we'll see more blame being put on the players, when in fact that is far from the truth.

3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
glb

glb

Posted
  • Author
Posted

He's so good Barca broke the law for him! So, he's clearly the new John Barnes.

Think the transfer committee got bored with a day or so of inactivity. They're like a teen that found dad's credit card buying all they can before they get rumbled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SaintM

SaintM

Posted
Posted

I hope we invest this chunk of the Suarez money as wisely as we did the last lot. It's a lot of money for a player in his last year, so I think both clubs can be happy with the deal.

He tailed off after Christmas for us, probably due to the off field contract stuff that was going on since then, but when he's on form he can be a reliable fixture of any back line.

Now, please fuck off and leave our players alone. Ta :)

2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tenrou

tenrou

Posted
Posted

I like Clyne, he's a good right back and we needed someone for that position so all good.

I'm kind of surprised that we haven't been linked with Ron vlaar. He's a free agent and a decent centre back. Another area we could do with competition in as we couldn't get a good partnership at all last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ryodi

ryodi

Posted
Posted

It was more a comment on how players from teams like Southampton can have amazing seasons but never make it into the England first team but as soon as they move clubs to one of the bigger sides they miraculously become first team regulars.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
glb

glb

Posted
  • Author
Posted

There's probably an element of cowardice in England managers - there's enough critics waiting to pounce so by picking players from so-called 'bigger' clubs they are taking the perceived safer option. Imagine marketing or such bollocks is a factor too.

Without wanting to sound like I'm donning a tin foil hat but there's been a long history of smaller sides' players being overlooked and there must be reasons behind it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • glb changed the title to Liverpool Football Club Thread

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept