Right Back Decision(s)

[Frogfish]

We are fast approaching crunch time (for Klopp to decide how he's going to play Trent & Bradley).

We have been soooo impressed with Bradley but not only that ... we've kept on winning for the majority of the 2 months Trent has been out (whilst generally looking more solid at the back). Trent has been out for 64 days and 14 games so far.

Today I was watching the 442 analysis of why Mac could be the magic sauce to get us across the line but I was also very taken with the Mac+Mo+Bradley triumvirate and how well they work together.

I am truly torn, will Trent returning (even though he's world class) disrupt the rhythm of the team? Will be be moved into midfield (too late in the day for Klopp to try this now - it would be a huge gamble when Endo-Mac-Szobo/Jones/Elliott works so well).

Watch this from 7 mins onwards :


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0JXO5trNt0

 

[Modo]

Why does the topic say Left back, but you're talking about Trent and Bradders?

Klopp isn't going to do anything crazy this late in the season. When Trent is up to speed it's bye-bye Bradders.
At left back it's going to be about who is the in-form player. At the moment it's Gomez, but they'll rotate.

 

[rurikbird]

Trent to play left-back?

 

[StevieM]

It’s all about options - Trent at RB will invert, which means it might be better to have Dom & Mac swap their more recent sides, or even have Mac drop in to the Endo role and CJ beside Dom.

Trent inverting opens up LB to get forward like Bradley does when JoGo inverts - that suits Robbo & Tsimikas better

 

[Brizzle]

Imagine that analysis but put the attacking full back version of Trent in (who was undisputedly the best RB in the world) and it would be even more powerful.

Why can't Klopp just sack off his inverted Trent experiment and say "win us the league from right back boy".

Either way, I am excited to have Trent back. There is possibly a world where Trent plays left back and inverts from there - if he plays most of the game in the centre, does it actually make a difference where he starts? This would be best for balance as Robbo is a shadow of himself, so having a proper full back in Bradley and an actual ball player 'inverting' could be a great combo.

 

[binomial]

Trent's days at fullback are limited and given how our midfield are all currently performing and the results we've had, there isn't any real need to rush him back into a starting birth. Let's keep making it about the team and not any 1 player.

A new manager will likely not tender to his needs and build the team so it's all about him.

 

[Brizzle]

I kind of agree. But I do think Trent in his 'old' role would be elite. I also think, having watched Gomez play LB 'inverted' a bit averagely against Brighton, that Trent would do that role many times better.

At the end of the day, no matter his weaknesses, Trent is a match winner and we need as many of these as we have on the pitch.

 

[Markeh]

You could see Macallister and Bradley look for each other from the start, there’s definitely an understanding there.

It’s strange but Trent could find himself second choice in two positions even though he’s the best at playing them simultaneously.

 

[Fabio]

Trent only walks back in to the side of he plays classic full back Trent. Otherwise it's a no from me.

 

[Brizzle]

I think he will walk straight back in, and then walk around the pitch for most of every game. This can be fine as long as we balance the width by having the other full back hug the touchline and give width.

 

[Frogfish]

Why does the topic say Left back, but you're talking about Trent and Bradders?

Klopp isn't going to do anything crazy this late in the season. When Trent is up to speed it's bye-bye Bradders.
At left back it's going to be about who is the in-form player. At the moment it's Gomez, but they'll rotate.

It doesn't (any more) !

Age related mental block, I constantly mix them up.

 

[Frogfish]

Imagine that analysis but put the attacking full back version of Trent in (who was undisputedly the best RB in the world) and it would be even more powerful.

Why can't Klopp just sack off his inverted Trent experiment and say "win us the league from right back boy".

Either way, I am excited to have Trent back. There is possibly a world where Trent plays left back and inverts from there - if he plays most of the game in the centre, does it actually make a difference where he starts? This would be best for balance as Robbo is a shadow of himself, so having a proper full back in Bradley and an actual ball player 'inverting' could be a great combo.

I would absolutely LOVE to see that. Trent at LB and Bradders at RB. Teams wouldn't know what hit them and they would know that there was a huge threat whether Bradders ploughed forward or Trent picked up the ball in our ⅓ or midfield.

 

[Squiggles]

For me, it's a simple case of dropping the inversion. We should not lose sight of the fact that Trent broke assist records playing as an attacking RB. Offensively he can do most Bradley offers and more (Bradley may be a more powerful dribbler). I couldn't give a shite about Trent's ambitions of playing CM this season, especially when Mac Allister is playing like a don.

With Robertson being injured/inconsistent and Gomez often playing LB, we're crying out for some width which is only provided by any enthusiasm by Bradley. Everyone else would rather be central or have to cut in. That has to change and the simple solution is to get Trent back playing with some chalk on his boots.

 

[doctor_mac]

Would it be worth us trying the double pivot with Trent and Endo which would provide much more cover for Bradley's raiding forward and take advantage of Trent's incredible capacity for deep play-making? It means that Slobby will become the spare wheel, but I wonder whether that might still be a better option if it allows us to take advantage of both Bradley and Trent.

 

[Fabio]

Would it be worth us trying the double pivot with Trent and Endo which would provide much more cover for Bradley's raiding forward and take advantage of Trent's incredible capacity for deep play-making? It means that Slobby will become the spare wheel, but I wonder whether that might still be a better option if it allows us to take advantage of both Bradley and Trent.

For me that's the vision. Traditional double pivot, allows full backs to bomb on, whilst not sacrificing solidity. I know there's tons of reasons why the inversion works.


Trent endo
Macca

Top tier stuff. Macca can even rotate when Trent needs the rest. Just becomes an issue of what to do with szob

 

[dee]

For me that's the vision. Traditional double pivot, allows full backs to bomb on, whilst not sacrificing solidity. I know there's tons of reasons why the inversion works.


Trent endo
Macca

Top tier stuff. Macca can even rotate when Trent needs the rest. Just becomes an issue of what to do with szob

... and Curtis

 

[Markeh]

For me, it's a simple case of dropping the inversion. We should not lose sight of the fact that Trent broke assist records playing as an attacking RB. Offensively he can do most Bradley offers and more (Bradley may be a more powerful dribbler). I couldn't give a shite about Trent's ambitions of playing CM this season, especially when Mac Allister is playing like a don.

With Robertson being injured/inconsistent and Gomez often playing LB, we're crying out for some width which is only provided by any enthusiasm by Bradley. Everyone else would rather be central or have to cut in. That has to change and the simple solution is to get Trent back playing with some chalk on his boots.

What was the reason for the inversion again? Having half dead central midfielders who needed help or that everyone else was doing it?

 

[bluebell]

It's a wonderful headache to have in MF and defence

 

[StevieM]

Imagine that analysis but put the attacking full back version of Trent in (who was undisputedly the best RB in the world) and it would be even more powerful.

Why can't Klopp just sack off his inverted Trent experiment and say "win us the league from right back boy".

Either way, I am excited to have Trent back. There is possibly a world where Trent plays left back and inverts from there - if he plays most of the game in the centre, does it actually make a difference where he starts? This would be best for balance as Robbo is a shadow of himself, so having a proper full back in Bradley and an actual ball player 'inverting' could be a great combo.

I think I’ve covered this a few times.

Teams changed their tactics constantly and opposition found a way to hurt us more. Basically, pushing both FBs high up the pitch meant not only were we exposed on the flanks, but if we were to keep a high line and a strong press it left us exposed through the middle.

To get an extra man in midfield you either move one there from defence or you move one there from the forward line - so you either invert a FB (or push a CB forward like City and have a FB slot into the back line) or you play a false 9 (like we did the previous season).

Basically whatever you need to do to create the box midfield that will give you an overload or protection.

Sone teams operate it more rigidly, some use players moving in from other positions - the latter offers greater flexibility.

Most other teams do it for control - we do it because it opens up space and time for Trent to move the ball quickly - which in turn means Darwin can do his chaos thing and we can shift the ball faster directly towards him.

So, if you keep Trent outside in a FB position pushing forward you likely have to pull Mac back beside Endo or we’re fucked through the centre - it’ll be last seasons Fabinho all over again.

If Trent’s inverting into midfield, he also has less distance to cover when he needs to get back to the RB position - but having that double pivot means one can plug the gap between the CB’s when the spread out to cover space in behind the FB’s.

Also, since he’s the current fav, you look at the Amorim set up - and it’s just a more rigid inflexible version of what we’re doing. That video in the other thread about how he’d set us up, talked about Virgil being the central defender pinging balls out from the back - Trent often drops deep in between the CB’s to get the ball and ping passes from there - but he doesn’t need to be there all the time.

If we’re moving players about a lot, it makes us less predictable and harder to set counter tactics for. If we’re rigid, we’ll get found out quickly.

I’m all for Bradley being able to invert or push wide up the pitch as well.

 

[Squiggles]

What was the reason for the inversion again? Having half dead central midfielders who needed help or that everyone else was doing it?

Pretty much. If memory serves, it started last season when the legs of Henderson and Fabinho had gone, and the forward press was disjointed, resulting in us needing a second body for structure/cover, but also to progress the play. It also appeased Trent's ambitions. It continued to make some sense when Mac Allister was getting overrun and Endo was getting up to speed in England, but as the midfield has positively evolved, it seems to make less and less sense to stick with it.

 

[Brizzle]

I think I’ve covered this a few times.

Teams changed their tactics constantly and opposition found a way to hurt us more. Basically, pushing both FBs high up the pitch meant not only were we exposed on the flanks, but if we were to keep a high line and a strong press it left us exposed through the middle.

To get an extra man in midfield you either move one there from defence or you move one there from the forward line - so you either invert a FB (or push a CB forward like City and have a FB slot into the back line) or you play a false 9 (like we did the previous season).

Basically whatever you need to do to create the box midfield that will give you an overload or protection.

Sone teams operate it more rigidly, some use players moving in from other positions - the latter offers greater flexibility.

Most other teams do it for control - we do it because it opens up space and time for Trent to move the ball quickly - which in turn means Darwin can do his chaos thing and we can shift the ball faster directly towards him.

So, if you keep Trent outside in a FB position pushing forward you likely have to pull Mac back beside Endo or we’re fucked through the centre - it’ll be last seasons Fabinho all over again.

If Trent’s inverting into midfield, he also has less distance to cover when he needs to get back to the RB position - but having that double pivot means one can plug the gap between the CB’s when the spread out to cover space in behind the FB’s.

Also, since he’s the current fav, you look at the Amorim set up - and it’s just a more rigid inflexible version of what we’re doing. That video in the other thread about how he’d set us up, talked about Virgil being the central defender pinging balls out from the back - Trent often drops deep in between the CB’s to get the ball and ping passes from there - but he doesn’t need to be there all the time.

If we’re moving players about a lot, it makes us less predictable and harder to set counter tactics for. If we’re rigid, we’ll get found out quickly.

I’m all for Bradley being able to invert or push wide up the pitch as well.

Yes - I can see the arguments for it. For me is it that we are inverting one of our greatest assets. And not only did he stop playing like a right winger, but then due to being isolated, our right winger stopped that too. We went from having two options down the right - either Mo cutting in onto his left, or Trent overlapping and fizzing it in from the byline... to having just the one option from Mo. Also very predictable.

Mo was even more of a threat when he had Trent around him.

On top of this - our left side this season has been below par, especially with Robbo injured and still finding form even now. This meant that the width on both sides was below par.

I think we solve this by either a) making the LB the 'inverter' i.e. start Trent there or b) have Trent 'invert' but ensure that the LB is an aggressive attacking one.

Anyway, I will still complain when attacking moves die because there is no one out on the right to play the ball too. And I will also continue to celebrate Trent's accomplishments playing in the middle. I just wish we were open to finding a way we could do both utilising our new gem in Bradley

 

[doctor_mac]

For me that's the vision. Traditional double pivot, allows full backs to bomb on, whilst not sacrificing solidity. I know there's tons of reasons why the inversion works.


Trent endo
Macca

Top tier stuff. Macca can even rotate when Trent needs the rest. Just becomes an issue of what to do with szob

I think Slobby can sub on for Trent or for Bradley or for Macca depending on the needs of the game. One of his best performances was when we were having a nightmare away to Wolves with Macca floundering in the 6 role so bad he was subbed at HT and Slobby stepped back into the 6 and changed the game, he was brilliant. I'd love us to try Slobby tonight in the 6 since we need to rest Endo anyway. Leave Macca where he is swagging the fuck out of things.

 

[rubans]

Trent in classic RB or inverted RB whatever but he is elite level compared to what we have. No need to try and push him into LB when he is the best RB we have.

 

[i_rushie]

... and Curtis

Agreed, it's Curtis for me. Endo and Mac Allister complement each other so well, and they bring so much to the team that cannot be replaced by others. The last place in that three man midfield should be taken by Curtis, if he returns from injury in good form. He's matured incredibly, and is so good at beating the press, for me, he is above Szobo and Trent in the pecking order.

As for Trent, poor mobility and limited desire to perform defensive duties mean he should be nowhere near the midfield.