I've now been a a Liverpool fan for five years (oddly that's how long I've been a real footy fan as well). Now I want to be a real student of the game. I want to to know more specific tactical strategies. I want to get beyond the generalities and dig deep. In short, I want to be able to hold my own with anyone who I ever get the chance to talk football with. It is after all my favorite sport now. With that in mind, I have a few questions to ask. 1) Can I consider myself a "supporter" of Liverpool? Or, because of my American birth, am I wrong in calling myself that? If not yet, then when? 2) Can someone compare and contrast the style/tactics of the great Reds' sides of the 70-80s and the Man Utd and Arsenal sides of the last decade or so? IE, I know Liverpool were known for their passing and movement, but did they rely more on the flanks, or up the middle? Did it matter? 3) direct freekick vs indirect why are each awarded? 4) Liverbird? Should the "liver" sound like the organ, or rhyme with fiver? I assumed the former, but once heard Steve Hunter pronounce it like the latter. Thanks in advance for your responses.
OK, I know a little bit about one of your four questions. I've done a fair amount of refereeing, but I don't know the LOTG newarly as well as some of the old fogies in the Referee forum. If you want to get REALLY particular, you can head over there. Here we go, off the top of my head: IFK: Offsides Obstruction Dangerous Play (high boot, etc.) Keeper specific rules (touching a ball kicked back to him, catching a throw in, etc.) DFK: there's three general catergories of these 1) tripping, pushing, striking 2) holding (NOT obstruction), handling the ball 3) tackling, charging I've forgotten the specific numbers of these, but ALL fouls fall under Law 12. For specific questions on any of that, I can refer you to the Laws of the Game, which can be found at: http://www.fifa.com/fifa/handbook/laws/2002/LOTG2002_E.pdf Hope that helps! P.S. I have been following the Reds for 7 years, and still consider myself an ignorant Yankee, not a supporter. I might re-evaluate my status after my pilgrimage. Also, I read a couple of books on tactics so I could kick my mates' asses at the old Championship Manager games, but I don't know squat about historical tactics, besides the fact that a 2-3-5 used to be cool. (?!?)
OK you guys, It’s nice that you’ve chosen the greatest team ever in England and I for one consider you honourary scousers. But a little of terminology correction might help here. Liver as in Liverbird is sounded as in fiver, even though in Liverpool it doesn’t. Makes perfect sense doesn’t it?! But one thing that really grates on me when hear it, is someone calling “Offsides” That is a legitimate US football term for an illegitimate move. In football/soccer it’s only “offside.” in the singular, even though you might have had four or five offsides in a game, plural! Call me picky but if you’re going on this pilgrimage, and I wish I could tag along, you don’t want to sound silly. Oh, get yourself the book “Lern yerself scouse” so youze can gerrout and pick up sum Judys.
UsScouse got here first. My name is pronounced Lie-ver-bird with the first i long rather than short as in the name of the city and football club. I'm American so I don't know what a native scouser LFC supporter would say, but I consider myself as much a supporter as any other man who can only see the matches on the tube, or hear them on the radio. (With the exception of my single pilgrimage). Maybe Kopite can give you a long explanation of the classic Liverpool sides as my personal viewing was confined to highlight shows on PBS.
I should know better, but I still do that all the time. Yet one more reason I don't officiate any ultra-serious games. The first time I slip that into a match report, I'm going to get chewed out.
I'll have a go. First thing to remember is that tactics never played that much of a role in the Boot Room. It was the established tradition that Liverpool put out their best 11 players and the opposition worried about them. End of story. In terms of end product, viz a viz the best sides of the Nineties, well, it was slower and more physical. And we were kings of the back pass, there can be no doubting that. Liverpool has always been about style allied to pragmatism. As Paisley said on the eve of his first European Cup campaign: "We shall do what we always do - snuff them out away and destroy them at home." Which is a 'tactical' mindset which survives to this day (witness our demolition of Roma in the CL last year after the crafty 0-0 in Rome). We were capable of utter poetry in motion (get yourself a video of the 5-0 against Forest) but when we needed a result, we would grind teams into the ground. It was merciless, pitiless winner's football - teams would literally boil with frustrated despair as we passed the ball in smooth, controlled patterns, utterly controlling the tempo and direction of the game, but ultimately just sitting on a 1-0 lead. I have seen opposition players in tears after a match against Liverpool, so utterly ruthless was our stranglehold approach to important away games. Rarely pretty, but even more rarely was it found wanting. As to players, well, that's the stuff of eternal debate. No one in today's top teams comes anywhere near our best players from back then, but in some instances you do have to allow for the rose-tinted specs having a say. There were some inarguables, however - Rush was the most extraordinary striker I've ever seen - way better than anything playing in this country today. And Dalglish, well ... incomparable. Nothing in boots exists here today to rival King Kenny. The things he could do, the passes he saw, the movement ... Christ, it's impossible to even begin to draw parallels to anyone still active today. In the middle, Souness was superior to Keane or Viera. Indeed, he was probably the best central midfielder in the world at that time. His transfer to Italy in the mid-80's cemented his claiim to that position. Our centre-backs were also aweseome for nigh-on 30 years, starting with Yeats, throught Smith, Hughes, Hansen, Lawro ... the start of our demise coincides totally with the retirement of the final two from amongst those greats. The only player currently active in the Premier League who could claim to be an equal to Hansen is Desailly. Hyypia has been anointed his LFC successor of course, and with good reason, but Hansen was still better by some margin. And then there's Barnes. World Class - easily better than Giggs or Pires are now. In fact, he was an almost perfect amalgam of the two - Gigg's speed and balance, Pires' close control. Other than that, well - we had no Beckham, that's for sure, but then we didn't need one - we more often than not played through the middle. Only in the mid-to-late 70's did we play with the traditional wide men and central target. After Toshie, the ball was always held up more centrally (another of Rush' primary skills) for midfielders to run onto. I went to Anfield for the first time as a nipper in 1981, so the Eighties are firmer ground for me than the 70's. There was always what appeared to be a perfect blend in the team. Artisans and artists. I mean, every one of them could play, make no mistake, but some were put into the side to make use of the ball, others to make the space for them to be able to do so. The pass-and-move philosophy at it's simplest best is something no team in this country can currently compare to, although you have to be fair and say that the time in which you can do so has typically diminished. It risks accusations of hyperbole, but the simplest way to describe Liverpool in the early 80's in full flow would be to reference Real Madrid's display against the Mancs last week. Not necessarily in terms of the tricks and the flicks, but in the almost other-wordly cohesion that existed amongst the players - and indeed in the philosophy. Were Real Madrid have the likes of Makalele and Conceicao to anchor the side and do the donkey work that allows the stars to shine, we had energetic runners like Kennedy, Lee, Johnston. One of my favourites was Jan Molby. Arrived from Ajax in 84 (I think ... can't be arsed to check, but it was around then). He was a tubby little so and so, even when he first arrived (by the time he departed in 1995 opposition fans would treat him to a chorus of "Roll out the Barrel" everytime he played ). But by God, could he pick a pass. The side could hum around him, he would be like a metronome, just sitting in the centre circle, receiving, distributing, receiving, distributing - pass out wide left, spread it back to the right, advance, pick up a cut-back, switch it left again ... mesmeric. Anyway, there is no point to this lengthening reminisce, just trying to paint a picture of the way Liverpool played back in the days when I was a little runt squashed up against the boards in the Paddock. As to the issue of "supporter" or not, it's all a bit banal. We have a global fan base. What matters is the extent to which a foreign fan attempts to experience, understand and appreciate the fan culture that has grown up amongst the domestic, regularly attending fan base and that typifies the club. The reason Mancs get it into the neck so much (and believe you me, regulars from Manchester fucking hate this, because it is unquestionably unfair to them) is because their club sees such archaic notions as an active impediment to the way in which the market their brand to the emerging markets. They don't want a fan culture that places what economists call "a barrier to entry" on potential new customers. So many, many fans amongst their global fanbase are all these lightweight Ra-Ra's with little or no concept of what the club (and if you scratch deep enough, there is stil one in there, it has to be said) stands for or what it means to be a United fan (go to Manchester and announce yourself as a "hardcore Man Yoo fan" and experience some famous Manc hospitality ... ). Our club has not - yet - gone to those extremes and the culture and mindset of the club and it's traditional fan base are still readily apparent to anyone who has the commitment and interest to look for it. So that's your definition of a "proper" fan. Doesn't matter how long you have supported us, what matters is that you "get" LFC.
I must flatter myself after reading Matt's post and forever more call myself a supporter. My having lived in England, and reasons for "choosing" the Reds have been posted here before, so I needn't go into that, but I think I do "get" Liverpool FC. A total commitmment to professionalism, excellence, full effort, acceptance of culpability, and fair dues to one's opponents. A working class work ethic that says hard work is what it takes to build anything worthwhile, and that the team is far and away more important than any individual. And last but certainly not least, a huge amount of love and respect for the supporters who make your glamorous life possible that you as a player repay by putting forth your very best effort each time you take the pitch. That in a nutshell is my view of the club--apart from the glorious history that IMO a formula similar to mine helped create. I truly do love this club. Reading Edge's book has made me incredibly jealous not to have known that kind of devotion to it as a child. I live on Oahu's north shore, one of the most beautiful places on earth, and I would chuck it all tomorrow if someone would offer me a job in Liverpool. Really. Fire at will if I got it all horribly wrong.
OK, here's my rant on this one. I became a supporter because I loved the cast of characters emerging in the mid 1990s, and because I wanted to follow a club that had a real community, a real family atmoshpere. However, every time I wear my scarf out and about, or get somebody turned on to the EPL and/or the Reds, I don't know whether I'm doing the club (and myself) any good. The kinds of people who become curious by my public displays of affection are the same type that have drained all the lifeblood out of the Scum and Real Madrid, and are starting to do the same for clubs like Arsenal. I want to support my club, but I realize that it is people like me who end up making a club soulless. As you say, the club itself is still toeing the line on this. Management is trying to expand financial opportunites, but not whoring itself out to anybody with a buck that wants a piece of our history. However, as we accumulate more and more foreign fans, it is going to be harder and harder to resist the opportunity of gimmicks such as the "partnership" between the Scum and the Other Scum (the New York Yankees). Somehow, I feel partially responsible for the slippery slope Liverpool are on. Although I try to contribute as much as I can (wish I could be on the Kop every Saturday, get up early to hear most fixtures on the radio, etc.), I am encouraging lifeless bandwagoners who should become Scum fans to follow my team and help pull it off the cliff, and it makes me tremendously uncomfortable. It's a real catch-22. If I support the club wholeheartedly, (especially in a MASSIVE emerging football market like the States), I am helping to throw it off a cliff. However, if I do anything less, I am doing the club a disservice by not really supporting it.
You are most welcome to come visit. I've already had one visitor through LFC connections. A supporter I "knew" from the official site came. I imagine it's really cheap now as well. Now back to the original purpose of the thread--my footy enlightenment. Even though I've not seen the great 70/80s team play-- I think that the style was perfect. Pass o the open man, and then find an opening yourself. Keep moving, keep running, pass with a purpose, and hold the ball. My qustion is this-Why in heaven's name don't we do it now. I prefer the KISS philosophy to the hit and hope any day.
Well, to an extent it's down to the tactical evolution of the game. We're not the only ones who have adopted the swift ball movement approach - the switch game, I have heard it called. I guess that is supposed to note the tactical fundament of switching weight of numbers and ball from attack to defence and back again with as quick and uncomplicated a series of movements as you can manage. Hinge it all on at least one - and often two - central midfielders as pivots and bang! You've got almost every team of note at the top of the game basically pegged. Arsenal play this way, United do, Newcastle try to. As i mentioned in my previous post - even Real use this approach as their basic building block. Simple pass'n'move is no longer as effective - players are fitter, the game faster. Where 20 years ago a simple passing move could drag a hole into an opposition formation for a striker to decisively exploit, you today face players who are more mobile and can recover their positon more easily. That's why, generally speaking, players are not as skillful now as they were 20 years ago - turnovers in football have increased exponentially, so possession is not the lethal weapon it used to be. Indeed, therein lies the basis of this latest tactical vogue (and, in truth, it has been prevalent now for some six or so years) - coaches will happily cede possession for territory, and vice versa. Today's tactics still seek the same goal as the old pass'n'move, it's just done differently. Where once a patient passing move would work the gap, now it has to be a lightning strike forward, usually from a counter-attacking positions. Space and pace are more of a premium now. The problem with Liverpool is, is that we are an extreme exponent of this tactical basic - partly because we don't yet have the experience and right blend of squad to rise beyond it and partly because Houllier, love him or loathe him, is a cautious soul. He would rather win five games 1-0 than win three by several goals and lose the other two. Next season is crunch time. No one can argue that this season has been a regression in terms of advancing to that higher niveau of playing, but then equally no one can deny the progress made before that was real and credible. It's up to GH and the lads to make it happen next season.
You could as well have mentioned the whole central line in the team. Liverpool always had strong central lines during the dominant years; from goalkeeper, through centerbacks, central midfield and forwards. The quality of the individual players in those important positions was probably the main reason to the continuous success. Not only were the players exceptional, but they also stayed for many years and gelled. One player in and another one out from time to time to tune the engine, but rarely big changes in the starting line-up from one season to another. There was no need to. I think Houllier needs a stronger backbone in the team to challenge for the Premiership title and beyond. Owen, Gerrard and probably also Hyypiä are strong enough, but there are 2,3,4 other decisive positions (depending on formation) to fill in the central line. I don't think the club is strong enough there today. I'm not too happy when the club is linked with yet another "unknown" and unproven foreigner. I think it's time for proven quality instead of promosing youth when the transfer window opens this summer. What do you think are the missing pieces in Liverpool's chase to win the Premiership, Matt?
Well, part of it is in the mentality. Houllier needs to let them loose a little. I think he has been concerned that the youth of the squad has mitigated against them possessing the collective maturity to play with the sort of abandon you need to win those games you need to win over the course of a season if you want to be in at the top come May. And this conscious policy has led to a degree of hesitancy that needs to be eradicated if we are to move on. Part of the problem was his (with hindsight) overly hasty decision to part with older, proven players in one big rush last summer (Macca III, Litty, Barmby) and not replace them with established Premiership experience. That will need to be addresses this summer. In terms of pure personnel, we need attacking full-backs (Finnan deal as good as done, according to local reports) and we need an 'older head' in midfield. Intriguingly, local gossip has us linked with a gazumping raid on Bolton for on-loan Okocha. That would be interesting, although you would still, I feel, need to add another solid central player. Out wide, the Kewell/Duff saga will probably come to a head one way or another. Of course, it all depends on whether we qualify for the Also Rans League or not - fail in that and we ain't got the cash to be going out and making massive adjustments to the squad.