Tactical flexibility: A double edged sword

THE last twelve months we have seen the shape of Liverpool FC evolve from a clearly defined 4-3-3, through a 4-2-3-1, then via a variation of a 4-4-2 and now into a 3-5-2.

Having the ability to mix things up can obviously be vital during the course of a season; whether it’s being done systemic or through personnel, having different options is more of a necessity now than ever before due to the ever increasing tactical demands of the game. Predictability must be avoided, at least until you have the group of players with the collective understanding to make it a strength.

One question you could ask, an important one I may add, is whether or not switching systems is a good thing to do – the right thing to do – for LFC and Brendan Rodgers at this point. Even though the principles and the pillars of our way of playing stays the same no matter the numeric combinations, there are obvious adjustments to make in terms of shape and individual roles when you switch between a back three and a back four.

Ideally speaking I would say the best thing to do is to stick to one system until you master it, something Liverpool don’t do at the moment. Personally I would have preferred Rodgers to stick with a back four and the hybrid 4-2-3-1 or 4-4-2, even during the recent period where the likes of Glen Johnson, Joe Allen and Philippe Coutinho were absent through injury. The reason for that has to do with the mastering of one system, both individually and collectively, before moving on to the next.

On the other hand though, with the squad he has to choose from now you could make a winning argument for the current 3-5-2 or 3-4-1-2 being the default system to continue with. If we look at the types and the depth we now have in each position around the pitch I think it’s as simple as playing with three at the back allows us to put as many as possible of our best players in the team.

The centre-back position, the position that looked like a potential problem area practically up until deadline day, is now perhaps our best position in terms of quality and depth. Coupled with having the likes of Glen Johnson, José Enrique and Aly Cissokho, who all like to contribute in the final third, it makes even more sense.

Another positive aspect of it is that in theory it frees up Steven Gerrard to make his forward runs and support the attack more often than when we play with a back four, when he needs to hold back more to help the team maintain its balance. And of course, the most compelling argument for sticking with the system is the fact that our three best attacking players – the ones who carry the majority of the creative and goal scoring burden – get to play in their best positions.

My concern, which at the moment isn’t a particularly big one, is that this Liverpool team will move through the season being a bit of a ‘neither nor’ unit. Pragmatism or flexibility, whichever you call it, is undoubtedly a good thing – at least up to a certain point. I believe in having a template, a way of playing that fundamentally stays the same no matter what, but I also believe it can be dangerous to get stuck in your own principles and refuse to find new ways of evolving. By that I mean it can be a bad thing to get too hung up in things like numeric combinations and refuse to stray from it, especially if you don’t have the players for it.

Rodgers appears to almost go in the opposite direction of just that. At the moment it sometimes seems like he is still trying to figure out what his best team and formation is, which is only natural given the fact that he’s still building a squad. Either that or he’s deliberately being highly pragmatic, taking it one game at a time, knowing that results are the only thing that matters this season.

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

Follow us on Twitter here: @live4Liverpool and ‘Like’ us on Facebook