Lack of a plan B or Abandonment issues?

[Pensively Staring 46]

So I read today that Klopp is being criticised for lacking a plan B when things aren't going Liverpools way. 

 

This is something I've seen laid at the doors of many managers who choose to play a brand of football that requires an almost pathological need to retain possession. Klopp, Pep, the Spanish national side, Arsenal at the latter stages of Wengers career and dare I say, our very own Mark " plan B is to do plan A better" Warburton. 

 

Just some things came to mind whilst reading the article on Klopp. Is the game in danger of becoming sterile with all these weird Abandonment and control freak issues being wrapped up as " philosophies". 

 

Whatever happened to just being shite on the night and getting pumped regardless of whatever letter of the alphabet your plan is at? 

 

Just some thoughts. 

[BlackSocksRedTops 3,495]

17 minutes ago, Pensively Staring said:

So I read today that Klopp is being criticised for lacking a plan B when things aren't going Liverpools way. 

 

This is something I've seen laid at the doors of many managers who choose to play a brand of football that requires an almost pathological need to retain possession. Klopp, Pep, the Spanish national side, Arsenal at the latter stages of Wengers career and dare I say, our very own Mark " plan B is to do plan A better" Warburton. 

 

Just some things came to mind whilst reading the article on Klopp. Is the game in danger of becoming sterile with all these weird Abandonment and control freak issues being wrapped up as " philosophies". 

 

Whatever happened to just being shite on the night and getting pumped regardless of whatever letter of the alphabet your plan is at? 

 

Just some thoughts. 

Much of what you've raised comes from the over analytical aspect of modern football. Teams are almost not allowed to have bad games these days and "form" is judged on a game by game basis. 

 

With regards to Klop and Liverpool, much of their recent issues stems from their midfield IMO. They've sorted out their defensive problems but haven't got the balance right in middle and I think they miss Henderson. He's not spectacular but can be vital in the engine room. Kieta and Fabhinio are also still finding their feet. Saying all that, they are unbeaten in the League and have made their best ever EPL start but for me they haven't reached the heights from last season yet. If you compare Liverpool this season to the how they were at this stage last season it's night and day. I still feel they have loads in the tank and when they click they are the only team that will get near City.

Edited November 7, 2018 by BlackSocksRedTops

[MacK1950 2,250]

Analysis/statistics seem to be the in vogue issue,long gone are the days of the "total football" edict.

You only have to be at a game and if thing are not going well hoping for a sub to be brought on.A look over at the dug-out sees one being readied,then 5-10 minutes later on he comes after being shown through pages of formations,it's so annoying.

 

[Pensively Staring 46]

19 minutes ago, MacK1950 said:

Analysis/statistics seem to be the in vogue issue,long gone are the days of the "total football" edict.

You only have to be at a game and if thing are not going well hoping for a sub to be brought on.A look over at the dug-out sees one being readied,then 5-10 minutes later on he comes after being shown through pages of formations,it's so annoying.

 

I chuckle whenever I see an assistant flip open his big binder and points to where the wing is. Pretty sure the winger knows vaguely where it is. 

 

Although it does answer why a substitution that should have been made at 60 minutes strolls on in the 80th.

[buster. 4,808]

Too many pundits from all over the media in competition with each other produces a plethora of wide-ranging & sometimes wild opinion, from which a small percentage might be worth reading or listening to.

 

The analysis that counts is that from within the clubs but I wonder how many clubs have a system that actually wins them more football matches?

 

 

Edited November 7, 2018 by buster.

[BlackSocksRedTops 3,495]

39 minutes ago, Pensively Staring said:

I chuckle whenever I see an assistant flip open his big binder and points to where the wing is. Pretty sure the winger knows vaguely where it is. 

 

Although it does answer why a substitution that should have been made at 60 minutes strolls on in the 80th.

 

[craig 5,199]

The problem I see with Liverpool is that if their front 3 aren't performing then they team aren't performing.  Their midfield don't offer enough goals or attacking threat.  If you shut down Salah and Mane and, to a lesser extent Firmino, then you shut down the whole team.  They need to find goals from midfield.  Wijnaldum, Henderson and Fabinho aren't those guys.

 

City play a slightly different formation but what is striking about City is the movement that they get from their players.  Outside of Fernandinho (who is a terrific player) they have goals coming from Aguero, Jesus, Sterling, Silva and de Bruyne (when fit).

 

You don't often see Wijnaldum or Henderson break beyond the attacking 3 to give opposing defences much to think about aside from that front 3 - City on the other hand have everyone in midfield breaking forward aside from Fernandinho.  They also play with their full backs very high, which offers attacking support at the same time as offering defensive assistance as soon as the attacking phase breaks down.

 

City on the weekend looked absolutely phenomenal.  Yes, it was "only" Southampton - but they could have scored 10.

[Rousseau 9,506]

There's so much preparation that goes into a game's tactical plan that it can be very difficult to change it within a match when it's not quite working. If it's a one-off match, then it's just a case of the plan being wrong; move on. If it's a pattern, it means the plan is being worked out, not working or the coach is not able to pass on his ideas -- or the players are no longer concentrating at 100%.

 

Gary Neville made a point on MNF that Man Utd played possession, played defensively, played on the counter-attack whenever it was required; a mix of plans for whatever the game needed in the moment.

 

That's OK when every team is doing the same, but teams/coaches specialise now in one philosophy. A team that is dipping into a variety of plans will always be inferior to a team that specialises in one plan. 

 

I don't think it makes the game sterile; quite the opposite. I think the contest of varying 'philosophies' makes it a very exciting time. I'd much rather see a team go all-out to specialise in one philosophy, becoming the best they can possibly be, rather than a team play a variety of half-baked styles, specialists in nothing.