• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The Dalglish column (bit of a dig?)...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Buddha

Very Well-Known
Member
The Kenny Dalglish column: Fearsome Fellaini shows you don't HAVE to play like Barca to win


Plus: Why there's no need for Manchester United to panic after Monday's mauling and why the fixture list is unfair to Newcastle

Everton+v+Manchester+United+-+Premier+League
Use your head: There's nothing wrong with "lumping it forward", Fergie!
Michael Regan
Marouane Fellaini's man-of-the-match display in Everton’s 1-0 win over Manchester United shows there is still a place for an old-fashioned target-man.
Fellaini’s performance also proved there is no definitive way for teams to set up and play, despite the trend to try to copy Barcelona’s passing game.
The key for any team is doing what works best for them and playing to their strengths, and David Moyes’ side certainly did that at Goodison Park on Monday.
People have different opinions on the way they game should be played, but you can only play the way you feel is best.
Teams need a range of options and many use big strikers up front. Everton have Fellaini, Liverpool have Andy Carroll and Chelsea achieved great success with the power and strength of Didier Drogba.
If you have a player of Fellaini’s size, aerial ability and physical strength, are you not going to utilise those assets?
Of course you are.
It would be wrong for a manager not to play to such a player’s strengths, whoever he is.
And what’s wrong with putting a player up front in the box and trying to score with a header? Nothing.
Just because it may take a team three passes – or a long ball – to get into the opposition area, doesn’t make them any less effective than one that gets there with an intricate build-up of 20-odd passes.
It’s what happens at the end of an attacking move that matters, not how you get there in the first place.
I know Sir Alex Ferguson said after Monday’s defeat that Everton just “lumped the ball forward”, but I don’t see anything wrong with that if it is effective.
If you can’t handle that, it’s a weakness in your team, not a criticism of the opposition for playing the way they do.
United were missing four defenders, but still had Nemanja Vidic, a big lad and as good a defender as there is, and Michael Carrick, who is also tall.
If you can’t cope with a player like Fellaini, then you suffer the consequences, as United did when he scored a header from a set-piece.
As a manager, you don’t like to concede any goal, but it’s a failure of your team’s marking and defensive duties when it comes from a set-piece.
When you play in the Premier League, you have to have the height to compete at set-pieces.
People criticise Stoke for their direct style, particularly from Rory Delap’s long throw-ins, but I don’t see anything wrong with that, as long as it’s within the rules of the game.
A couple of years ago Tim Cahill played up front for Everton, with Fellaini dropping off him, and now he’s gone, Fellaini is fulfilling that role.
When Fellaini arrived in England, it was as a defensive midfielder, but the way he played on Monday showed just how much he has developed since then.
Barcelona are a fantastic side to watch, no one would dispute that. But they didn’t win La Liga last season, Real Madrid did.
So why isn’t everyone copying Jose Mourinho’s approach and style of play?
Madrid winning the title proved teams can achieve success with more than one style.
Barcelona are a superb side, but there is more than one way to win a game and be successful as a team – as Everton showed in beating United.
Not every team can play like Barcelona and I don’t think having a direct style should be frowned upon.
Drogba terrorised defences in the Premier League and Europe for years and showed that physical and aerial strength can be just as important as technical ability when it comes to being an effective forward, something Fellaini proved against Manchester United.
 
It's hard, in fact, nigh on impossible, to read that without seeing it as aimed at Liverpool, Rodgers & their attitude towards Carroll.

He's got every right to say so though, & a great many of our fans agree to some degree or another.
 
Didn't do you any good, Kenny. In fact we lost when you tried to play good footy and you lost when we tried to boot it.

I'm just glad we've got a modern manager, with modern ideas and a sensible look at players.
 
Ha! A dig indeed. Nothing wrong with that tho really. Although weirdly it does make me feel strangely protective of BR.
 
Even at its very best, when some fans were saying how good it was, our play was utterly predictable, not particularly penetrative and really ineffective. At its worst, Downing would run down the wing, fail to be his man and play the ball backwards. Rinse, wash, repeat. Towards the end, we'd lump it up to Carroll, who would bring it down and nothing would happen.
 
Even at its very best, when some fans were saying how good it was, our play was utterly predictable, not particularly penetrative and really ineffective. At its worst, Downing would run down the wing, fail to be his man and play the ball backwards. Rinse, wash, repeat. Towards the end, we'd lump it up to Carroll, who would bring it down and nothing would happen.

Perfect summation of last season
 
Not perfect IMHO. We also had appalling luck. If even half the shots with which we hit the woodwork had been translated into goals we'd have been well in the mix for a CL place. At times we *will* need the kind of option which Carroll represents. If Brendan Rodgers refuses to use it regardless of circs.he'll be making the same mistake Kenny made, just from a different angle. The real trouble is that you don't use a £35 mill.player as just a bench option.
 
For me, the fact that he quoted Fergie's saying of "lumped the ball forward" showed he was responding to the claim. Had this been a usual column out of his own thoughts, then yeah, maybe dig at BR and the Carroll issue. I'd prefer to think that in this case, its a direct comment on what Fergie said at the post match conference.
 
One substantive thing I can say about this, I think Sahin's arrival can help Carroll to be more effective. In fact, it can help him tremendously. In Sahin we will finally have somebody who can produce a long-range aerial pass with pace, precision and consistency required for attacking play - something we have sorely lacked since Alonso left (with only Gerrard supplying it occasionally). It might be still in question how well Nuri will adapt to the the Premiership, but what's not in question is his ability to put a ball on a plate for a striker - from any range.

Imagine how much more effective Carroll could be if instead of fighting for a 50/50 or 30/70 ball lumped in his general direction, he could get the pass delivered precisely in the area where he has an advantage over the defender, with enough pace so that a defender just does't have time to position himself perfectly. Pace of the ball also means that an attacker doesn't have to generate power when hitting the ball, just need to redirect into the goal or a teammate. And defenders who try to intercept have to be wary of bad bounces, the likelihood of which increases exponentially the faster the ball is traveling.

Also, Sahin's deliveries from corners and free-kicks will be a step up from anything we've seen in many years and that has to benefit Carroll as well.

I hope Brendan doesn't NEED to sell Carroll to finance the players we already bought or are about to buy (Dempsey?) because there is a good chance Carroll can become significantly more effective with better service. I think Dalglish has a point in that while a long ball strategy in build-up is much less effective than tiki-taka, a good cross to a powerful striker can still be deadly. They are not mutually exclusive.
 
Whatever one may think of him as a manager, I don't think Kenny would ever have a dig at LFC. He made the same points about Barca a year or so ago. The 'make the most of what you've got' point is pretty obvious and innocuous.
 
One substantive thing I can say about this, I think Sahin's arrival can help Carroll to be more effective. In fact, it can help him tremendously. In Sahin we will finally have somebody who can produce a long-range aerial pass with pace, precision and consistency required for attacking play - something we have sorely lacked since Alonso left (with only Gerrard supplying it occasionally). It might be still in question how well Nuri will adapt to the the Premiership, but what's not in question is his ability to put a ball on a plate for a striker - from any range.

Imagine how much more effective Carroll could be if instead of fighting for a 50/50 or 30/70 ball lumped in his general direction, he could get the pass delivered precisely in the area where he has an advantage over the defender, with enough pace so that a defender just does't have time to position himself perfectly. Pace of the ball also means that an attacker doesn't have to generate power when hitting the ball, just need to redirect into the goal or a teammate. And defenders who try to intercept have to be wary of bad bounces, the likelihood of which increases exponentially the faster the ball is traveling.

Also, Sahin's deliveries from corners and free-kicks will be a step up from anything we've seen in many years and that has to benefit Carroll as well.

I hope Brendan doesn't NEED to sell Carroll to finance the players we already bought or are about to buy (Dempsey?) because there is a good chance Carroll can become significantly more effective with better service. I think Dalglish has a point in that while a long ball strategy in build-up is much less effective than tiki-taka, a good cross to a powerful striker can still be deadly. They are not mutually exclusive.

That's all good Rurik (as per), the flip side is that his first touch can generally be poor so despite the precision giving him a head start, he still has to get the ball under control. I know his touch 'can' be good, but it can also be dreadful. I just don't see Carroll still being here September 1st, it's a shame but everything's just pointing the other way. I suspect if he does end up staying he'll be in for a pretty miserable season sat on the bench.
 
Not perfect IMHO. We also had appalling luck. If even half the shots with which we hit the woodwork had been translated into goals we'd have been well in the mix for a CL place. At times we *will* need the kind of option which Carroll represents. If Brendan Rodgers refuses to use it regardless of circs.he'll be making the same mistake Kenny made, just from a different angle. The real trouble is that you don't use a £35 mill.player as just a bench option.
Appalling luck certainly, however our game plan was "try in vain until suarez magics up something"

I said at the time, our movement was abysmal and a waste of time.
 
Imagine how much more effective Carroll could be if instead of fighting for a 50/50 or 30/70 ball lumped in his general direction, he could get the pass delivered precisely in the area where he has an advantage over the defender, with enough pace so that a defender just does't have time to position himself perfectly. Pace of the ball also means that an attacker doesn't have to generate power when hitting the ball, just need to redirect into the goal or a teammate. And defenders who try to intercept have to be wary of bad bounces, the likelihood of which increases exponentially the faster the ball is traveling.


Imagine how more effective we would be if we'd spent 35m on a striker who didn't require the same again spent on other players and several years worth of integration just to make adequate use of his talents.

The hint should be in the fact that I would struggle to think of the last time a top team spent money, time and effort trying to get a big target man in, so that they could lump the ball up to... sorry, I mean, "long range aerial pass with pace" to.

City haven't... Utd haven't... Arsenal haven't... Spurs haven't... Newcastle haven't... Chelsea haven't.

West Ham, Sunderland, Wolves, Everton... well they have, I suppose.
 
Andy Carroll required a certain type of football to be effective. He's slow, unintelligent and he's not even very good at heading the ball. Let's ship him out for somebody who is more than just a battering ram.

The reason we didn't get fourth last year wasn't because of luck, or refs, or anything other than the fact we had a load of mid-table and (lower) quality players. Adam, Downing, Carroll, Henderson, Spearing... when these players make up the bulk of your side, you're in trouble. It's really as simple as that.
 
Keegan says he's one of the best headers of a ball he's seen. Another half-wit, I suppose. Maybe it's something to do with the number 7 shirt.
 
Well, the 35m is spent now. So, we're left with the situation of making the most of what we've got. If somebody offers 15 to 20 million quid for Carroll then great and good.

If nobody does and we don't make the most of what we got, then we'll end up with an Aqualini situation and end up reducing an asset of the club to nothing.

We've seen with Rafa that the constant getting rid of players quickly that doesn't quite fit in with your plans will take its toll on a football club.
 
We've seen with Rafa that the constant getting rid of players quickly that doesn't quite fit in with your plans will take its toll on a football club.

True, although when he bought Crouch he was patient and worked hard to improve him.
 
Keegan says he's one of the best headers of a ball he's seen. Another half-wit, I suppose. Maybe it's something to do with the number 7 shirt.

I don't really listen to Keegan much when he talks about football, he's always been a bit of a dunce. I remember him professing to everyone that Gerrard would eventually be a centre half.
 
I don't really listen to Keegan much when he talks about football, he's always been a bit of a dunce. I remember him professing to everyone that Gerrard would eventually be a centre half.

Well, loads of people have said that. I prefer Rafa's suggestion that he'll end up playing further forward, but Keegan's comment was hardly eccentric. He was possibly remembering Emlyn.
 
Well, loads of people have said that. I prefer Rafa's suggestion that he'll end up playing further forward, but Keegan's comment was hardly eccentric. He was possibly remembering Emlyn.

Yeah true, and he probably could have, but anyone who's anyone would have recognised that his forward play would have been wasted in defense, in the long run.
 
If we get Dempsey he is very good in the air and can fulfil the role some people are expecting Carroll to play, i.e. a Plan B, plus he's a hell of a lot more mobile, more versatile and has better technique.
 
Yeah true, and he probably could have, but anyone who's anyone would have recognised that his forward play would have been wasted in defense, in the long run.

Mark, for once I don't agree. Keegan will have been talking about the time when Stevie won't be able to produce that forward play any more, at least not with any regularity. I have to say I think it was a reasonable point to make.
 
Keegan says he's one of the best headers of a ball he's seen. Another half-wit, I suppose. Maybe it's something to do with the number 7 shirt.

Maybe we should play him at centre back then.

Can't be any less mobile that Carragher is now, I suppose.
 
I said Stevie will be a cb just a couple of days ago. I think he'd be a perfect cb for us tbh.

His game intelligence is the best I've ever seen, he can read moves so amazingly well strikers who have played in front of him never show the same form without him supplying the balls, that tells you a great deal.

With the entire pitch in front of him & that long range passing I think he could easily turn defence into attack so often that we'd hope they'd try to play past him so we could hit them on the counter when he dispossessed them.
 
True, although when he bought Crouch he was patient and worked hard to improve him.

The thing was though, that sticking with players that didn't fit in, was even worse, as under Houllier. It's all a judgement, thing. Finding the right player to stand by (Crouch, Lucas), and getting shut of the ones that you don't think will cut it (Morientes, Keane) compared to playing bad players because you signed them (Cheyrou, Baros).

PS I am not saying Rafa didn't sign dross or Houllier didn't sign great players too FYI, he did. But Houllier stood by his mistakes a lot longer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom