A Tactical Discussion: What approach should Roy employ?

Monday night’s defeat at Manchester City could be put down to many reasons, but one factor which stood out was how Liverpool’s midfield lost the battle with City’s.

I had expected a 4-2-3-1 approach from Hodgson, but reckoned without the late withdrawal of midfielder Mascherano which forced us into a reshuffle, probably prompting the inclusion of current top scorer David Ngog. Lucas and Gerrard were overrun at times in midfield, concentrating on sitting back and trying to stop City play through them rather than closing down in midfield, since City had the extra man in the middle.

While this is fine in principle, in this type of match and especially away from home, a central midfield pairing like this places a lot of strain on the wide attackers getting forward quickly at the beginning of our attacks. At this, Liverpool were too often unsuccessful at getting Dirk Kuyt and Milan Jovanovic involved further up the pitch, resulting in City regularly winning the ball back in the first half without having to defend too vigorously.

David Ngog did his best at dropping deeper to try to link up play at times but this is not really his role and he could not really hold the ball up between the lines as well as needed to give Jovanovic and Kuyt the time to get forward.

Thus, the formation we were (perhaps forced into) playing did not really suit the players on the pitch.

In past years we have tried to add a lot of pace to the wide areas with players such as Jermaine Pennant, Mark Gonzalez and Ryan Babel all tried out, with no lasting success to date. This was part of the reason why moving somebody like Steven Gerrard further forward to link the play and give the wide players who were more creative but did not possess such pace – Kuyt, Maxi, Luis Garcia, Benayoun etc – the chance to take up their positions while the play was moved through the middle of the pitch. In this way the 4-2-3-1 became more successful for Liverpool, while also meaning we could rely on an at-the-time fit Fernando Torres to play and score regularly.

For the best part of 2 years the argument has been that we needed a “quality backup” to Torres, but the problems with this are abundant: Firstly, no quality forward wants to be a mere backup; secondly, quality forwards are both hard to come by and increasingly expensive; and thirdly to play this forward regularly alongside, and not just instead of, Torres would require both a formation shift and the exclusion of another player.

For the formation we played against City it is almost a pre-requisite that the team be possessed of at least one incredibly fast winger; an archetypal Martin O’Neill player in fact. Usually a converted forward who didn’t score so many goals, very fast, stuck out wide to get forward at every opportunity and especially on counter attacks. We did indeed try this out on one or two of our own for a period with Djibril Cisse operating on the right flank often and Sinama-Pongolle deployed on both flanks from time to time. Allied to that, the two strikers need to be able to work with each other and bring out the best in each other. Torres and Ngog have barely featured on the pitch at the same time since the young Frenchman joined the club, and will need more time to gel if they are to produce the goods in tandem. A lot of work in training would be required to let these two goalscorers function together and to know each other’s runs.

By the players we have now, a 4-3-3 (or any variation thereof, including 4-2-3-1) is probably Liverpool’s best way forward at the moment. Wide forwards with an eye for goal are an essential ingredient for attacking teams and Dirk Kuyt and – hopefully – Milan Jovanovic should both be able to contribute plenty throughout the campaign.

Three central midfielders give us the balance to allow Gerrard, Cole or both to get forward at every opportunity while still having a covering presence in the midfield, while both are creative and forceful enough to get into the box and make or take chances. Cole is obviously another who can play the wide forward role but I would prefer to keep him in a central role for now, leaving Maxi, Pacheco and Babel to cover the remaining attacking positions. Poulsen and Lucas, plus youngster Jay Spearing, give Liverpool’s central midfield more depth, though the on-off transfer of Mascherano would leave both a sizable hole to fill and, surely, some money to spend on multiple transfers if it comes off in time.

A four man defence in either a 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 is largely the same at this point, with perhaps the full backs needed to get forward even more in the 4-3-3 formation if the wide forwards are wont to cut in or attack through the centre at times.

Liverpool remain in need of a full-back and while I wouldn’t name Paul Konchesky as my preferred option he has at least worked under Hodgson before and knows what he requires in terms of organisation and when to get forward. Carlos Salcido would represent good value for an experienced and attack minded left back if the quoted prices are true, though it remains to be seen if any interest was actually there or if it was mere paper talk.

The two above formations and their variations are far and away the most used in the Premiership, with the odd exception playing a 4-1-4-1 or an occasional 10-0-0 from the smaller sides, but one other option would be to switch to a 3 man defence. We saw this on occasions under Benitez against the likes of Sunderland or Newcastle, generally teams who did play with a two man strikeforce, but it is a difficult system to get right defensively and requires certain players with very specific tactical and technical qualities.

For starters, 2 of the 3 central defenders must be able to cover at full back (defensively, not in an attacking sense) and at least 1 if not 2 of them should be able to bring the ball out of defence with confidence and with an ability to distribute. High level of understanding, organisation and communication are also an absolute must. All these things Liverpool manage to cover, with both Carragher and Skrtel having played at full back for the Reds on the right side, and Agger able to slot in on the left. A problem comes with changing those starting three – Wilson and the likes of Kelly or Ayala are not as experienced as the others and have quite possibly never played as a three man defence, while Kyrgiakos would be a very good replacement for the central man but less so for the two on either side.

Further up the field when playing a three man defensive system, the possibilities are rather endless. A team can choose to play with wing-backs, three central midfielders and two forwards (the old 5-3-2 we played under Roy Evans for example), or with two central midfielders and two wide attackers supporting one centre forward (see Kewell and Gerrard behind Crouch vs Newcastle a few years ago).

One main benefit of any 3 man defensive system is to carry the play and press the opposition back by overloading in the midfield and attacking areas, as the interplay between defence/midfield and midfield/attack can be difficult to defend against. The likes of Danny Agger would be especially important as he is capable of moving into midfield positions with ease, which would be required especially against opponents who tended to leave only one man upfield when Liverpool had possession. Should three central defenders be left at the back to manage one attacker, at least one man is wasted and this advantage of playing the system would be lost.

However, as mentioned above it is an extremely difficult system to manage defensively and places high strains, both physically and team tactically, on the wide players (wing-backs or wide midfielders) and the central defenders. A very large amount of tactical training is required to perfect the art of “tilting” the defence, and each player needs to make very good decisions regarding when to move forward and what defensive position to take up when the opponent takes up possession, especially on the counter attack.

It is unlikely that this formation would be used much by Liverpool, except perhaps on rare occasions as utilised by the former management. A 3 man defence is called for from many fans when we are not perceived to be attacking enough against smaller teams but usually it is without thought for the system in place – a four man defence where both full backs get forward often only leaves two defenders in place anyway, not the four usually quoted when the argument to switch to three defenders is perceived as more attacking.

For now, the way forward seems to be the 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 that we have been used to over the past few years. Until more pace or guile is added to the wide areas, or a stronger midfield quartet can be relied on regularly, it seems unlikely that Liverpool will persist with two genuine centre forwards. Until the ownership issue is resolved there will likely not be enough funds to allow any major surgery to the squad enabling the manager to bring in the exact type of players he would like, so for now we will have to hope that the one or two new faces we might get in before the end of August will add to the quality of the team and will offer both an increase at what the team is already good at and their own little something extra thrown in for good measure.

Follow us on twitter @live4Liverpool

Live4Liverpool is recruiting columnists. For further info contact the site editor at editor@live4liverpool.com