Liverpool 1 Man United 2, Tottenham 2 QPR 1
Summary:
Liverpool seem contented with having the same weaknesses and strengths as their last 4 games, while United are worryingly poor in executing their strategies against teams who have their plan A sorted out.
Tottenham and QPR played out game that was high on entertainment but low on tactical quality, as AVB tried to have his cake and eat it by fielding a star-studded lineup in midfield WHILE having Gareth Bale in defence. AVB fixed that problem in the second half, but the match was still equally as poor but the entertainment level never dropped, and Spurs, as most pundits would put it, "wanted it more".
Liverpool 2 Man United 1
Lineups:
Liverpool field a 4-3-3 with their best XI at hand to execute it, the front 3 of Suarez, Borini and Sterling backed up by Joe Allen, Shelvey and Gerrard in midfield. United fielded the predicted 4-2-3-1, but with Giggs and Carrick in the center of the park, Nani and Valencia wide to test Liverpool's fullbacks, and Kagawa directly behind van Persie.Liverpool will attempt to use Brendan Rogers' possession philosophy to pass United off the park, while for United, the onus is for their wide players to take advantage of Liverpool's lack of width to create chances as Sunderland did last week.
- Liverpool don't allow United to breathe, United's wingers disappoint
Liverpool's areas of strength lie in the fluidity and the quality of their wing forwards, as well as the well defined roles of their midfield. The gameplan of a 4-3-3 is obvious, but when carried out well, is unstoppable. However, when defending with a 4-3-3, a lot of pressure is put on the wide-forwards to close down passes in order to prevent the ball from bypassing the midfield into the space that they leave vacant - the wide areas.
In the first half, Liverpool's 3 forwards, as well as Shelvey and Gerrard did extremely well in pressing United's midfield and defense down, forcing United's players into hurried clearances. Offensively, Suarez often dropped deep to play incisive passes towards Sterling and Borini, which maximised Liverpool's possession. However, with Lindergaard and United's backline relatively dilligent and Borini being particularly wasteful, Liverpool didn't create anything significant of note.
- Liverpool attempt to keep shape, United enforce possession
After Shelvey's red card, Liverpool played as a 4-2-3 in offence and a 4-4-1 in defence, which is expected of a team missing a central midfielder. Liverpool caught United cold at the start of the second half, Gerrard profiting off poor marking from United's defense, although credit to Johnson for being brave to link up with Suso on front.United's tweak in transition, which was to hold onto the ball more with Scholes in midfield, was carried out after his introduction. United's gameplan, however, in attacking Liverpool on the wings, remained the same and Rafael profited from an attack on the right, using Valencia to outnumber Johnson, and using Kagawa to playing himself in for his goal. As predictable as that might sound, with Suso on the left, Rodgers knew that this was a risk already.
- Henderson's introduction makes Suso shine, United play it patient
Prior to United's winner, Brendan Rogers made another switch, attempting to outscore United by bringing on Henderson for Sterling. This may sound surprising to most, but with Henderson in midfield to keep possession alongside Gerrard and Allen, Suso was relieved of his defensive duties and attacked behind Suarez in attack. The youngster duly delivered as chance after chance was created, but never converted.While Liverpool's offensive gameplan was certainly a new one for Sir Alex, his defensive weaknesses weren't, and when Liverpool lost the ball with men high up the pitch, Valencia exploited the space and Liverpool conceded the penalty.
Fantasy Implications:
United's poor performance will create uncertainty in terms of investment in their squad, but with many trusting the form of Robin van Persie, it's hard to blame them. The rest of the squad will need further monitoring for differentials, if any of them would have a decent run in the starting lineup at all. As for Liverpool, life without Shelvey will be their challenge as we might perhaps see the rise of Gerrard again, unless Suso gets a decent run in the squad and proves himself.
Tottenham 2 QPR 1
Lineups:
Spurs have Kyle Naughton out, so Gareth Bale slips into left back and the midfield now looks slightly skewed: With Sandro just ahead of defense, Dembele, Dempsey, Sigurdsson, Lennon line up behind Defoe in attack. Spurs' strategy this game will be interesting not just because of Gareth Bale's role as a left back, but it we will also examine who among the front 4 behind Defoe will be the most effective in this lineup.
As for QPR, Their spine is established to be Granero and Faurlin in the center of midfield, Nelsen and Hill behind them, while Park Ji Sung started on the left flank while Shaun Wright Phillips started on the right. The most intriguing, however, will be Hoilett's inclusion behind Bobby Zamora. While Hoilett is naturally a wide player or a wide forward, he started to gain attention when playing as a second striker behind Yakubu in his Blackburn days, and his role in attack will be also examined here.
There was nothing good to say about both sides in the first half. Tactically. With Bosingwa's early injury, QPR had Onuoha at left back and Kieron Dyer at right, which should be really, really good news for Gareth Bale. Instead, both teams had their basics horribly wrong.
While Spurs were supposed to dictate the midfield with their central midfielders, the passing was wayward and not incisive at all. For all of Dembele's direct running, Sigurdsson's passing ability and Dempsey's combination of both, neither of the 3 had efforts or goal, and only Sigurdsson had one key pass to Defoe who shot wide anyway.
Lennon would often have to receive the ball deep and make 60 yard runs, making him significantly less threatening compared to making his runs off the ball last week.
QPR, though, were equally poor, but the difference between the two sides is that Hoilett seems to be winning all the individual battles. It wasn't a surprise when QPR took the lead from Spurs being second to the second ball, Hoilett and Zamora's movement not tracked at all, and Zamora finished clinically.
A poor first half from both teams tactically was matched in the second, where QPR basically took their foot off the gas. Spurs plugged some holes by bringing on Caulker for Sigurdsson, and with the balance on both wings, Spurs improved from way below average to "just average".
With Spurs having an orthodox 4-4-2 for once, they still relied on their wingers to create chances, but QPR were more than aware of Bale and Lennon's threat, at least until QPR conceded the own goal from a corner.
With QPR's confidence down, Spurs benefited from more slack defending and allowed Vertonghen to counter, and Defoe made no mistake utilising the chance 3v2. It was also a surprise to see QPR react as late as the 73rd minute when they brought on Mackie and Cisse.
Spurs, however, were growing in confidence, and the partnership on the left flank of Bale and Vertonghen started to cause QPR problems.
With QPR and Tottenham's passing in the attacking third both poor, both sides had chances to capitalise but their defense bailed them out time and time again. Nevertheless, it was an entertaining match between the two sides despite the poor tactical quality of both sides, and anyone could've won it really.
As for QPR, Their spine is established to be Granero and Faurlin in the center of midfield, Nelsen and Hill behind them, while Park Ji Sung started on the left flank while Shaun Wright Phillips started on the right. The most intriguing, however, will be Hoilett's inclusion behind Bobby Zamora. While Hoilett is naturally a wide player or a wide forward, he started to gain attention when playing as a second striker behind Yakubu in his Blackburn days, and his role in attack will be also examined here.
Tactical Notes:
- It's all about basics. And Junior Hoilett
There was nothing good to say about both sides in the first half. Tactically. With Bosingwa's early injury, QPR had Onuoha at left back and Kieron Dyer at right, which should be really, really good news for Gareth Bale. Instead, both teams had their basics horribly wrong.While Spurs were supposed to dictate the midfield with their central midfielders, the passing was wayward and not incisive at all. For all of Dembele's direct running, Sigurdsson's passing ability and Dempsey's combination of both, neither of the 3 had efforts or goal, and only Sigurdsson had one key pass to Defoe who shot wide anyway.
Lennon would often have to receive the ball deep and make 60 yard runs, making him significantly less threatening compared to making his runs off the ball last week.
QPR, though, were equally poor, but the difference between the two sides is that Hoilett seems to be winning all the individual battles. It wasn't a surprise when QPR took the lead from Spurs being second to the second ball, Hoilett and Zamora's movement not tracked at all, and Zamora finished clinically.
- Spurs get Bale out of defense and finally show up, but they game didn't change much
A poor first half from both teams tactically was matched in the second, where QPR basically took their foot off the gas. Spurs plugged some holes by bringing on Caulker for Sigurdsson, and with the balance on both wings, Spurs improved from way below average to "just average".With Spurs having an orthodox 4-4-2 for once, they still relied on their wingers to create chances, but QPR were more than aware of Bale and Lennon's threat, at least until QPR conceded the own goal from a corner.
With QPR's confidence down, Spurs benefited from more slack defending and allowed Vertonghen to counter, and Defoe made no mistake utilising the chance 3v2. It was also a surprise to see QPR react as late as the 73rd minute when they brought on Mackie and Cisse.
Spurs, however, were growing in confidence, and the partnership on the left flank of Bale and Vertonghen started to cause QPR problems.
With QPR and Tottenham's passing in the attacking third both poor, both sides had chances to capitalise but their defense bailed them out time and time again. Nevertheless, it was an entertaining match between the two sides despite the poor tactical quality of both sides, and anyone could've won it really.
No comments:
Post a Comment