redeagle
05-01-2008, 07:56 PM
The majority of pundits and football fans are quick to wax lyrically about the quality of the squad at the disposal of Liverpool manager Rafa Benitez.
While there is no doubting the depth of talent in terms of big-name, mid-priced players, the attacking effectiveness of the squad suggests that Liverpool could still be a player or two of genuine class short in the offensive third.
When you compare Liverpool to the other 'Big Four' teams since Benitez took charge at Anfield in 2004, it is clear where their problems lie.
In his first season—2004-2005, which ended gloriously in Istanbul—Liverpool fared pretty poorly in the Premier League. This was disappointing, but acceptable to realistic fans of the club, as they knew that it would take time to turn the team into a potent force at home.
The Reds finished fifth that season, and failed to score in 13 of their matches in the Premier League. In the same season Arsenal failed to score in just three games, eventual champions Chelsea failed five times, and surprisingly, a faltering Manchester United failed to find the net in 10 matches.
Chelsea were champions again in 2005-2006, but failed to score on six separate occasions. This was one less than second-place Manchester United, who recaptured their form in front of goal.
Arsenal, meanwhile, had a dismal season, failing to score in 11 matches and finishing a distant fourth.
Liverpool improved significantly in 2005-2006, scoring a record haul of 82 points to finish third, and failing to score in only eight matches.
The improvement shown in 2005-2006 was quickly forgotten by 2006-2007. Liverpool endured another dismal Premier League season, failing to find the net 13 times for the second season in three years under Benitez.
Liverpool accrued enough points for third place, but were well adrift of Chelsea and champions Manchester United, who both failed to score in only four matches. Arsenal also improved in this regard, failing to find the net just seven times, but still only finishing fourth.
This year shows Liverpool again lagging behind in the regular goal-scoring stakes, despite reshaping their forward line and wide players in the last two seasons. In their 20 matches so far, Liverpool have failed to score five times. Chelsea have been shut out with the same frequency, but when you consider their injury problems and change of manager, they must be considered to be ahead of Liverpool in this regard.
Arsenal have shown dramatic improvement, only failing to score in one match thus far. Manchester United have failed to net only three times, and two of those were in the first three matches of the season, as they started slowly off the blocks.
In total: Since Benitez took over, Liverpool have failed to score in 39 league matches out of 132, a percentage of 29.5. Chelsea have the best record, failing to score just 20 times from 133 matches, at just 15%. Manchester United and Arsenal are tied at 22/133, or 16.5%.
This is the problem Liverpool must solve, if they are ever to challenge for the Premier League title under the Spaniard.
There could be many reasons for this dismal record. The element easiest to blame is the manager's much-maligned rotation system. Personally, I don't buy that—statistically Benitez rotates at roughly the same level as Ferguson at United, and as Mourinho did at Chelsea: approximately 120 team changes per season, or about three players per game on average.
Another argument could be that the manager himself is just too defensive—so obsessed with stopping the opposition, that his players do not have the freedom to score enough goals,because they are overtly bound by a rigid system. Again, I don't think this argument survives under scrutiny.
Chelsea under Jose Mourinho played a very similar way to Liverpool under Benitez, in terms of focusing first on clean sheets and attacking in a largely one-dimensional manner—yet they managed to have a better record than the widely-considered flair teams of Arsenal and Manchester United, in terms of consistency of scoring from one game to the next.
I would argue that the reason for the relative failure of Liverpool to turn dominance into goals is obvious: the attacking players are just not good enough compared to their rivals.
Would Kewell, Kuyt, Voronin, and Pennant, for example be any more effective in a free-flowing attacking team where they were picked every week? I think the answer is clear—they would not, because they do not have sufficient quality, or sufficient pace.
Torres and Babel have given Liverpool a new edge this season, an edge which has seen them rack up regular four-goal bursts in matches, and even six and eight on occasion. But when teams defend deep, and in numbers—like Manchester City did on Sunday—or defend high, and flood the midfield to force the Reds to go wide—like Wigan did yesterday—Liverpool are still neither clinical nor inventive enough.
Two top-class attacking players are needed for this Liverpool team to mount a realistic challenge at any time in the future—and until such talents arrive, the Liverpool squad can have all the apparent depth it likes, but it will not make a jot of difference in the title race.
I would like Liverpool to have four strikers: Torres, Crouch, Babel (as an understudy to Torres), and another option instead of Crouch. Perhaps Dean Ashton, Afonso Alves, Jan Klaas Huntelaar, or Karim Benzema could be possiblities for this spot.
The wide positions need to be reinforced as well. In my opnion, only Yossi Benayoun is good enough in the current crop. So, Kewell—and Pennant, in particular—should be moved on. Options here could include Ricardo Quaresma, Ashley Young, David Bentley—or less well known squad options such as Ivan Sproule, Wes Hoolihan, or Michael Kightly (from Bristol City, Blackpool, and Wolves respectively).
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/5720-European_Football-Blackburn_Rovers-Chelsea-Liverpool-Liverpool_under_Rafa_All_too_often_a_blunt_instrum ent-030108
good read.
While there is no doubting the depth of talent in terms of big-name, mid-priced players, the attacking effectiveness of the squad suggests that Liverpool could still be a player or two of genuine class short in the offensive third.
When you compare Liverpool to the other 'Big Four' teams since Benitez took charge at Anfield in 2004, it is clear where their problems lie.
In his first season—2004-2005, which ended gloriously in Istanbul—Liverpool fared pretty poorly in the Premier League. This was disappointing, but acceptable to realistic fans of the club, as they knew that it would take time to turn the team into a potent force at home.
The Reds finished fifth that season, and failed to score in 13 of their matches in the Premier League. In the same season Arsenal failed to score in just three games, eventual champions Chelsea failed five times, and surprisingly, a faltering Manchester United failed to find the net in 10 matches.
Chelsea were champions again in 2005-2006, but failed to score on six separate occasions. This was one less than second-place Manchester United, who recaptured their form in front of goal.
Arsenal, meanwhile, had a dismal season, failing to score in 11 matches and finishing a distant fourth.
Liverpool improved significantly in 2005-2006, scoring a record haul of 82 points to finish third, and failing to score in only eight matches.
The improvement shown in 2005-2006 was quickly forgotten by 2006-2007. Liverpool endured another dismal Premier League season, failing to find the net 13 times for the second season in three years under Benitez.
Liverpool accrued enough points for third place, but were well adrift of Chelsea and champions Manchester United, who both failed to score in only four matches. Arsenal also improved in this regard, failing to find the net just seven times, but still only finishing fourth.
This year shows Liverpool again lagging behind in the regular goal-scoring stakes, despite reshaping their forward line and wide players in the last two seasons. In their 20 matches so far, Liverpool have failed to score five times. Chelsea have been shut out with the same frequency, but when you consider their injury problems and change of manager, they must be considered to be ahead of Liverpool in this regard.
Arsenal have shown dramatic improvement, only failing to score in one match thus far. Manchester United have failed to net only three times, and two of those were in the first three matches of the season, as they started slowly off the blocks.
In total: Since Benitez took over, Liverpool have failed to score in 39 league matches out of 132, a percentage of 29.5. Chelsea have the best record, failing to score just 20 times from 133 matches, at just 15%. Manchester United and Arsenal are tied at 22/133, or 16.5%.
This is the problem Liverpool must solve, if they are ever to challenge for the Premier League title under the Spaniard.
There could be many reasons for this dismal record. The element easiest to blame is the manager's much-maligned rotation system. Personally, I don't buy that—statistically Benitez rotates at roughly the same level as Ferguson at United, and as Mourinho did at Chelsea: approximately 120 team changes per season, or about three players per game on average.
Another argument could be that the manager himself is just too defensive—so obsessed with stopping the opposition, that his players do not have the freedom to score enough goals,because they are overtly bound by a rigid system. Again, I don't think this argument survives under scrutiny.
Chelsea under Jose Mourinho played a very similar way to Liverpool under Benitez, in terms of focusing first on clean sheets and attacking in a largely one-dimensional manner—yet they managed to have a better record than the widely-considered flair teams of Arsenal and Manchester United, in terms of consistency of scoring from one game to the next.
I would argue that the reason for the relative failure of Liverpool to turn dominance into goals is obvious: the attacking players are just not good enough compared to their rivals.
Would Kewell, Kuyt, Voronin, and Pennant, for example be any more effective in a free-flowing attacking team where they were picked every week? I think the answer is clear—they would not, because they do not have sufficient quality, or sufficient pace.
Torres and Babel have given Liverpool a new edge this season, an edge which has seen them rack up regular four-goal bursts in matches, and even six and eight on occasion. But when teams defend deep, and in numbers—like Manchester City did on Sunday—or defend high, and flood the midfield to force the Reds to go wide—like Wigan did yesterday—Liverpool are still neither clinical nor inventive enough.
Two top-class attacking players are needed for this Liverpool team to mount a realistic challenge at any time in the future—and until such talents arrive, the Liverpool squad can have all the apparent depth it likes, but it will not make a jot of difference in the title race.
I would like Liverpool to have four strikers: Torres, Crouch, Babel (as an understudy to Torres), and another option instead of Crouch. Perhaps Dean Ashton, Afonso Alves, Jan Klaas Huntelaar, or Karim Benzema could be possiblities for this spot.
The wide positions need to be reinforced as well. In my opnion, only Yossi Benayoun is good enough in the current crop. So, Kewell—and Pennant, in particular—should be moved on. Options here could include Ricardo Quaresma, Ashley Young, David Bentley—or less well known squad options such as Ivan Sproule, Wes Hoolihan, or Michael Kightly (from Bristol City, Blackpool, and Wolves respectively).
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/5720-European_Football-Blackburn_Rovers-Chelsea-Liverpool-Liverpool_under_Rafa_All_too_often_a_blunt_instrum ent-030108
good read.