Rafael Benitez

[Kasper]

Perez came on for Colback, not Diame.

 

To play 10 so Mo could drop into cm.

?

Post was directed at Kasper.

 

It was KI who brought that sub up. I think it's a sub he has done a numerous times though isnt it?

 

And I personally haven't seen what it has brought to the table.

Think he was onabout Perez coming off for Diame.

 

Aye, it was just a regular sub that's happened a few times as an example. I wasn't talking specifically about yesterday.

 

Based on a quick look that sub hasn't happened that way around once this season. At least in the league.

 

It absolutely has. Huddersfield and Bristol just off the top of my head and vs Cardiff, Sheff Wed and Derby they were both substituted for different players, but went into that number 10 position like 5 to 10 minutes later.

 

What? I'm confused. You just cleared up that you're talking about Perez coming off for Diame yet you give examples of the opposite?

 

But if we are talking about that sub then it's even worse example. I gave you an example of what Mitrovic coming on for Gouffran would bring to our game yet you gave none for Perez. How has bringing Perez on for Diame answered the problems we've had in those situations. How has that change improved us? What is the potential improvement there and what is the plan that swap is based on?

[mighty__mag]

Perez came on for Colback, not Diame.

 

To play 10 so Mo could drop into cm.

?

Post was directed at Kasper.

 

It was KI who brought that sub up. I think it's a sub he has done a numerous times though isnt it?

 

And I personally haven't seen what it has brought to the table.

Think he was onabout Perez coming off for Diame.

 

Aye, it was just a regular sub that's happened a few times as an example. I wasn't talking specifically about yesterday.

 

Based on a quick look that sub hasn't happened that way around once this season. At least in the league.

 

It absolutely has. Huddersfield and Bristol just off the top of my head and vs Cardiff, Sheff Wed and Derby they were both substituted for different players, but went into that number 10 position like 5 to 10 minutes later.

 

What? I'm confused. You just cleared up that you're talking about Perez coming off for Diame yet you give examples of the opposite?

 

But if we are talking about that sub then it's even worse example. I gave you an example of what Mitrovic coming on for Gouffran would bring to our game yet you gave none for Perez. How has bringing Perez on for Diame answered the problems we've had in those situations. How has that change improved us? What is the potential improvement there and what is the plan that swap is based on?

 

Short answer is,there wasn't one. Perez at 10 is dog spunk!

[Guest firetotheworks]

Perez came on for Colback, not Diame.

 

To play 10 so Mo could drop into cm.

?

Post was directed at Kasper.

 

It was KI who brought that sub up. I think it's a sub he has done a numerous times though isnt it?

 

And I personally haven't seen what it has brought to the table.

Think he was onabout Perez coming off for Diame.

 

Aye, it was just a regular sub that's happened a few times as an example. I wasn't talking specifically about yesterday.

 

Based on a quick look that sub hasn't happened that way around once this season. At least in the league.

 

It absolutely has. Huddersfield and Bristol just off the top of my head and vs Cardiff, Sheff Wed and Derby they were both substituted for different players, but went into that number 10 position like 5 to 10 minutes later.

 

What? I'm confused. You just cleared up that you're talking about Perez coming off for Diame yet you give examples of the opposite?

 

But if we are talking about that sub then it's even worse example. I gave you an example of what Mitrovic coming on for Gouffran would bring to our game yet you gave none for Perez. How has bringing Perez on for Diame answered the problems we've had in those situations. How has that change improved us? What is the potential improvement there and what is the plan that swap is based on?

 

Well I didn't, I wasn't talking exclusively about Perez for Diame but, wait for it, Diame for Perez too. I've also given those other examples where they replaced each other in the same position within the space of 5 or 10 minutes with each other, just in case you want to let your hair down and go full pedant.

 

I've answered the rest as well, I've already said that it's 'different players with different attributes contributing in different ways to make different things happen.' Your original point was that Rafa doesn't have a plan B, you're now saying "How has bringing Perez on for Diame answered the problems we've had in those situations." which is more along the lines of 'Why doesn't Rafa's plan B work?' So you've changed your original point there, but to answer the question, Diame for Perez often sees improvement. The fact that it doesn't happen in Perez's case whether he's starting or coming on is because he's in absolutely shocking form. Why Rafa continues with him is up for debate, but my opinion is that it's a mixture of believing in his ability and there simply being no better alternative.

[Bimpy474]

Perez came on for Colback, not Diame.

 

To play 10 so Mo could drop into cm.

?

 

You tosser I was rubbing my screen thinking I had dirt on it. (the black thumbs up) 

 

Its not black? You on laptop?

 

I'm on my work computer, normal desktop one. It's definitely black on mine.

[TheDonis]

The main thing you have to understand about Rafa, when it comes to tactics, subs, in-game changes, everything, is his need to 'control the game.' That is his be and end all. I remember when we drew with Hull at Anfield in a crazy game. It was 3-3 something and an absolute farce of mistakes, broken play, goals and chaos. Great to watch, though the result was shit for a home fan. Rafa was aghast. There was no control on the pitch. He hates that. So at 0-0 he will be happy if his team has control as more often than not that control will lead to a goal. Of course if it doesn't, and someone makes an error or there's a worldie out of nowhere, then you lose. But Rafa will take that because more often than not control leads to victories, and failing that a draw. He will also try and trust in his team to fight a way back from a deficit IF they have control. What he won't do - until it's late on and he's desperate - is bung strikers and unbalance the team and risk losing control, because he'll wonder how you can do that and score. So at 0-0 in your match he would have believed that control would lead to a goal and that control would lead to you holding on to that. BR scored so he changed it, but still seeking control.

 

Liverpool fans constantly wanted his team to throw off the shackles during these kind of runs. But he will stick to his guns because he believes, with justification, that control leads to wins and as the team grows in confidence they start to crush teams and often win heavily. It's rarely exhilarating, but that requires an element of risk and risk of losing control, but is no less pleasing and effective. IF he has the right players for it i.e ones who don't keep fucking up and making the control came to naught.

[mighty__mag]

Perez came on for Colback, not Diame.

 

To play 10 so Mo could drop into cm.

?

 

You tosser I was rubbing my screen thinking I had dirt on it. (the black thumbs up) 

 

Its not black? You on laptop?

 

I'm on my work computer, normal desktop one. It's definitely black on mine.

 

Its Android so probably different on pc

[ExiledGeordie]

 

Diame albeit flashes recently has flattered to deceive and Perez just hasn't turned up this season. That's definitely affected the team and Rafas plans badly I'm sure. Hopefully some signings address this.

[Kasper]

Perez came on for Colback, not Diame.

 

To play 10 so Mo could drop into cm.

?

Post was directed at Kasper.

 

It was KI who brought that sub up. I think it's a sub he has done a numerous times though isnt it?

 

And I personally haven't seen what it has brought to the table.

Think he was onabout Perez coming off for Diame.

 

Aye, it was just a regular sub that's happened a few times as an example. I wasn't talking specifically about yesterday.

 

Based on a quick look that sub hasn't happened that way around once this season. At least in the league.

 

It absolutely has. Huddersfield and Bristol just off the top of my head and vs Cardiff, Sheff Wed and Derby they were both substituted for different players, but went into that number 10 position like 5 to 10 minutes later.

 

What? I'm confused. You just cleared up that you're talking about Perez coming off for Diame yet you give examples of the opposite?

 

But if we are talking about that sub then it's even worse example. I gave you an example of what Mitrovic coming on for Gouffran would bring to our game yet you gave none for Perez. How has bringing Perez on for Diame answered the problems we've had in those situations. How has that change improved us? What is the potential improvement there and what is the plan that swap is based on?

 

Well I didn't, I wasn't talking exclusively about Perez for Diame but, wait for it, Diame for Perez too. I've also given those other examples where they replaced each other in the same position within the space of 5 or 10 minutes with each other, just in case you want to let your hair down and go full pedant.

 

I've answered the rest as well, I've already said that it's 'different players with different attributes contributing in different ways to make different things happen.' Your original point was that Rafa doesn't have a plan B, you're now saying "How has bringing Perez on for Diame answered the problems we've had in those situations." which is more along the lines of 'Why doesn't Rafa's plan B work?' So you've changed your original point there, but to answer the question, Diame for Perez often sees improvement. The fact that it doesn't happen in Perez's case whether he's starting or coming on is because he's in absolutely shocking form. Why Rafa continues with him is up for debate, but my opinion is that it's a mixture of believing in his ability and there simply being no better alternative.

 

Yeah you've answered that but if you're going to be so vague about the actual things that happen on the pitch you might as well say "I don't know".

 

If there's a plan then surely it has to be based on some idea? If it's not, I wouldn't call it a plan. And I'd hope the idea is more than "they are different players".

 

I gave an example of a sub that would bring something different (with actual examples of how!) and you compared it to Perez & Diame saying that Rafa often makes changes like that to change the game. I've yet to hear one real argument for that change other than "They are different players". I don't know how I could ask this question any clearer: How them being different players are meant to improve us when we're struggling. How is Perez answering the problem created when the opponent is defending with 5 center halves? I'm genuinely interested as I haven't seen anything.

 

[Kasper]

The main thing you have to understand about Rafa, when it comes to tactics, subs, in-game changes, everything, is his need to 'control the game.' That is his be and end all. I remember when we drew with Hull at Anfield in a crazy game. It was 3-3 something and an absolute farce of mistakes, broken play, goals and chaos. Great to watch, though the result was shit for a home fan. Rafa was aghast. There was no control on the pitch. He hates that. So at 0-0 he will be happy if his team has control as more often than not that control will lead to a goal. Of course if it doesn't, and someone makes an error or there's a worldie out of nowhere, then you lose. But Rafa will take that because more often than not control leads to victories, and failing that a draw. He will also try and trust in his team to fight a way back from a deficit IF they have control. What he won't do - until it's late on and he's desperate - is bung strikers and unbalance the team and risk losing control, because he'll wonder how you can do that and score. So at 0-0 in your match he would have believed that control would lead to a goal and that control would lead to you holding on to that. BR scored so he changed it, but still seeking control.

 

Liverpool fans constantly wanted his team to throw off the shackles during these kind of runs. But he will stick to his guns because he believes, with justification, that control leads to wins and as the team grows in confidence they start to crush teams and often win heavily. It's rarely exhilarating, but that requires an element of risk and risk of losing control, but is no less pleasing and effective. IF he has the right players for it i.e ones who don't keep fucking up and making the control came to naught.

 

Two things I'm interested in.

 

What do you/he consider control? Ball control? If it's not leading to goal scoring opportunities are you really in control of the game?

 

What does he do when the team is losing control? How does he react? What did he change in that Hull game? What did he change yesterday in the 10-15 mins before the goal when you could see us dropping a lot deeper than the first half (and giving them more control).

[jackyboy]

Everyone has views and opinions as I do. But, I also think that perhaps, just perhaps, Rafa has more experience than any of us, sees the players more than any of us and actually knows more than any of us. So, until we tumble down the league and drop out of an automatic promotion place I'll believe that he is doing the best job possible with what he has to work with

[Kasper]

Everyone has views and opinions as I do. But, I also think that perhaps, just perhaps, Rafa has more experience than any of us, sees the players more than any of us and actually knows more than any of us. So, until we tumble down the league and drop out of an automatic promotion place I'll believe that he is doing the best job possible with what he has to work with

 

I believe that every manager in the world is also a human being and sometimes operates in a certain way because they have certain tendencies or things they firmly believe in, habits even. Sometimes those things might be holding you a back a bit. He's a great manager but I don't consider these things something that couldn't be discussed and argued about just because Rafa knows best.

 

If we believed he does everything perfectly whats the point of talking about anything other than how shit Colback is. It doesn't even matter who we sign. He's gonna be the best we can get because Rafa picked him.

[Hanshithispantz]

You're completely missing the argument like. Rafa isn't a perfect manager, nobody is really. He probably made mistakes yesterday and not for the first time this season. The issue is with people claiming he hasn't got a plan - that going 4-4-2 or whatever is what he needs to do to turn games around. Like we lost yesterday because he just didn't spot that we needed to change things or that he chose not to change things out of stubbornness.

[Wallsendmag]

Everyone has views and opinions as I do. But, I also think that perhaps, just perhaps, Rafa has more experience than any of us, sees the players more than any of us and actually knows more than any of us. So, until we tumble down the league and drop out of an automatic promotion place I'll believe that he is doing the best job possible with what he has to work with

 

Might as well close this thread now then. Pointless if we can't comment on his team selection/tactics etc because he knows more than us.

[STM]

Everyone has views and opinions as I do. But, I also think that perhaps, just perhaps, Rafa has more experience than any of us, sees the players more than any of us and actually knows more than any of us. So, until we tumble down the league and drop out of an automatic promotion place I'll believe that he is doing the best job possible with what he has to work with

 

Might as well close this thread now then. Pointless if we can't comment on his team selection/tactics etc because he knows more than us.

 

Good idea.

[Guest firetotheworks]

Fucking hell, is there really any point? This is unbelievably boring and completely unnecessary like.

 

I've already told you why you would change players,

Specifically why you would change Diame and Perez, the differences between the strengths of play of Perez and Diame - the plan would be to play to those strengths, that's obvious. 

Why that same principle doesn't apply to Gayle/Mitrovic,

 

Your original point was 'Rafa has no plan B' -  I've showed you a few different plan Bs that Rafa has employed.

Then you changed your point to 'Rafa doesn't have a plan B that works' - a different point.

Now you're asking me to give you a step by step guide on why different players can produce different results, which is a very basic premise that doesn't really need to be explained. It's a plan unto itself, a very basic one, but a plan nonetheless.

 

What is it that you actually want?

 

I gave an example of a sub that would bring something different (with actual examples of how!)

 

No you didn't. You telling me how you think it would work isn't an example, it's a theory. That's just how you think it would work. An example would be a match in which Mitrovic played up front, with Gayle in Gouffran's position and it working in the way you've described it, with Gayle running into space. As that hasn't happened, you don't have an example, just a theory.

 

and you compared it to Perez & Diame saying that Rafa often makes changes like that to change the game.

 

For fucks sake, what is it with this fucking forum at times, man? For the third time now, I wasn't comparing, I was explicitly telling you why they're NOT the same, i.e. contrasting - the exact opposite of comparing. Diame/Perez does happen often. Gayle/Mitrovic doesn't happen often. Therefore they're different.

 

See?

 

You don't see what's looking to be achieved by changing Perez for Diame (for example)? They have different ways of playing for a start, that's before getting onto how one of them is in dire form and the other isn't. Diame drives at teams and gets out wide, Perez is supposed to be the typical tricky number 10, but isn't.

 

Gayle for Mitrovic would come under the same bracket as the Perez for Diame example above, with the obvious reason that this doesn't happen being that one is the league's top scorer and the other isn't anywhere near that.

 

I said the Mitrovic/Gayle comes under the same bracket as Diame/Perez i.e. different players with different attributes contributing in different ways to make different things happen. The reason that it doesn't happen in the case of Mitrovic and Gayle is, imo, because moving Gayle to accommodate Mitrovic is lunacy.

[jackyboy]

Can't see anywhere that I said you can't comment. Like you I have my opinion and voiced it

[mrmojorisin75]

What did he change yesterday in the 10-15 mins before the goal when you could see us dropping a lot deeper than the first half (and giving them more control).

 

thing is you see this literally every weekend if not almost every single game in football, i suppose the idea is that you coach players day in day out and then have to trust them to some level of professionalism and mental acuity within themselves to adapt to certain situations, get a grip of the game and put you back on top, rather than knee-jerking it the first sign a game is not going entirely your way (consider how dominant we were yesterday btw)

 

when the tide turns as it does in most games you don't always get pegged back or go behind as we did yesterday and then no-one mentions it

[Dokko]

Was loads of bed wetters in the crowd yesterday, some booing at the end as well

 

Subs were questionable but the options on the bench weren't up to much. Couple of signings in Jan and we'll be absolutely fine.

 

Tbf he bought most of them (5/7)

[Dunedin]

The only good thing about this game is it uses up another game and not a league one of Shelveys suspension

[TheDonis]

The main thing you have to understand about Rafa, when it comes to tactics, subs, in-game changes, everything, is his need to 'control the game.' That is his be and end all. I remember when we drew with Hull at Anfield in a crazy game. It was 3-3 something and an absolute farce of mistakes, broken play, goals and chaos. Great to watch, though the result was s*** for a home fan. Rafa was aghast. There was no control on the pitch. He hates that. So at 0-0 he will be happy if his team has control as more often than not that control will lead to a goal. Of course if it doesn't, and someone makes an error or there's a worldie out of nowhere, then you lose. But Rafa will take that because more often than not control leads to victories, and failing that a draw. He will also try and trust in his team to fight a way back from a deficit IF they have control. What he won't do - until it's late on and he's desperate - is bung strikers and unbalance the team and risk losing control, because he'll wonder how you can do that and score. So at 0-0 in your match he would have believed that control would lead to a goal and that control would lead to you holding on to that. BR scored so he changed it, but still seeking control.

 

Liverpool fans constantly wanted his team to throw off the shackles during these kind of runs. But he will stick to his guns because he believes, with justification, that control leads to wins and as the team grows in confidence they start to crush teams and often win heavily. It's rarely exhilarating, but that requires an element of risk and risk of losing control, but is no less pleasing and effective. IF he has the right players for it i.e ones who don't keep f***ing up and making the control came to naught.

 

Two things I'm interested in.

 

What do you/he consider control? Ball control? If it's not leading to goal scoring opportunities are you really in control of the game?

 

What does he do when the team is losing control? How does he react? What did he change in that Hull game? What did he change yesterday in the 10-15 mins before the goal when you could see us dropping a lot deeper than the first half (and giving them more control).

 

Control of the ball and territory, which in his view leads to goal scoring opportunities.

 

I searched for the game. It was actually 2-2. We went 2-0 down against the run of play and then pulled it back to 2-2 by half time. Rafa thought we were too open it was clear at half time told us to be more disciplined. We piled it on second half but couldn't get a winner. Get this - Rafa was criticised for not putting Robbie Keane on in the second half, instead choosing to put on Ryan Babel and Nabil El Zhar (El Zhar missed a sitter to win it). When he was asked why he didn't put Keane on he said, and i quote, 'Using more people in the box is not a guarantee.'

 

I remember it well because it sparked a massive debate about whether Rafa should have just carried on going for it once we got back from 0-2 to 2-2 as we might have ripped them to shreds.

 

As a coda, we finished second that season with a then PL record of 86 points, four behind Man U, which would have won the league in many season. Last quarter of the season we were unstoppable. But there are those who still think that natural caution of Rafa's cost us a couple too many draws early in the season and gave Man U the opening. I don't. He got that season spot on and we were damned unlucky not to win it.

[Robster]

Good input TD. Cheers.

[Altamullan]

Derisive smart-alecky gibes abound... welcome to 2017!!

[edit: the author has deleted it; good on ye man, HNY  ]

[Guest firetotheworks]

The main thing you have to understand about Rafa, when it comes to tactics, subs, in-game changes, everything, is his need to 'control the game.' That is his be and end all. I remember when we drew with Hull at Anfield in a crazy game. It was 3-3 something and an absolute farce of mistakes, broken play, goals and chaos. Great to watch, though the result was s*** for a home fan. Rafa was aghast. There was no control on the pitch. He hates that. So at 0-0 he will be happy if his team has control as more often than not that control will lead to a goal. Of course if it doesn't, and someone makes an error or there's a worldie out of nowhere, then you lose. But Rafa will take that because more often than not control leads to victories, and failing that a draw. He will also try and trust in his team to fight a way back from a deficit IF they have control. What he won't do - until it's late on and he's desperate - is bung strikers and unbalance the team and risk losing control, because he'll wonder how you can do that and score. So at 0-0 in your match he would have believed that control would lead to a goal and that control would lead to you holding on to that. BR scored so he changed it, but still seeking control.

 

Liverpool fans constantly wanted his team to throw off the shackles during these kind of runs. But he will stick to his guns because he believes, with justification, that control leads to wins and as the team grows in confidence they start to crush teams and often win heavily. It's rarely exhilarating, but that requires an element of risk and risk of losing control, but is no less pleasing and effective. IF he has the right players for it i.e ones who don't keep f***ing up and making the control came to naught.

 

Two things I'm interested in.

 

What do you/he consider control? Ball control? If it's not leading to goal scoring opportunities are you really in control of the game?

 

What does he do when the team is losing control? How does he react? What did he change in that Hull game? What did he change yesterday in the 10-15 mins before the goal when you could see us dropping a lot deeper than the first half (and giving them more control).

 

Control of the ball and territory, which in his view leads to goal scoring opportunities.

 

I searched for the game. It was actually 2-2. We went 2-0 down against the run of play and then pulled it back to 2-2 by half time. Rafa thought we were too open it was clear at half time told us to be more disciplined. We piled it on second half but couldn't get a winner. Get this - Rafa was criticised for not putting Robbie Keane on in the second half, instead choosing to put on Ryan Babel and Nabil El Zhar (El Zhar missed a sitter to win it). When he was asked why he didn't put Keane on he said, and i quote, 'Using more people in the box is not a guarantee.'

 

I remember it well because it sparked a massive debate about whether Rafa should have just carried on going for it once we got back from 0-2 to 2-2 as we might have ripped them to shreds.

 

As a coda, we finished second that season with a then PL record of 86 points, four behind Man U, which would have won the league in many season. Last quarter of the season we were unstoppable. But there are those who still think that natural caution of Rafa's cost us a couple too many draws early in the season and gave Man U the opening. I don't. He got that season spot on and we were damned unlucky not to win it.

 

[Hanshithispantz]

Derisive smart-alecky gibes abound... welcome to 2017!!

[edit: the author has deleted it; good on ye man, HNY  ]

I deleted it because instead of editing because I cannot really be bothered. Your weird obsession with me is doing my head in though, please fuck off

[Altamullan]

Thanks Donis  . As you've probably seen the same debates gaining some momentum here, as ever (self included) as people are frustrated re this approach solely as we have looked predicable and had some poor results. It is lovely of you to take the time to caste some light rather than stoking heat on the issue.