Do Liverpool need a "Plan B"?

[manwithnoname]

There's been a lot of chat about this over the years. When a team has a strong squad and can bring on quality players from the bench to change a game. Or recently, when Pinnochio talked about Spurs being able to play 3 at the back, as another tactical option. Or more prosaically, when what you're doing and how you play, doesn't always yield a result.

So it's a broad - perhaps even meaningless - phrase for being able to "change things". We talked about it plenty this season, and perhaps it's more relevant than ever, given that we have such an obviously ingrained and well-implemented style of football under Klopp.

Benteke went because he couldn't play how Klopp wants. Sturridge can't get a game for the same reason.

So when we struggle to impose our game on the opposition - United, Burnley, Southampton - the talk always turns to how we can make in-game changes and improvements. The Plan B.

But what, genuinely is it? as you know, I'm a fan of statistics and facts and relevant data. So I'm a bit wary of terms like "Plan B" wildly bandied about, like it's a proveable, accepted method in football.

I get the basic gist, but can it actually be quantified? Arsenal scraped a lucky draw against United with a goal from sub Giroud, who scored a header that no other player in the squad could have scored. Is that what it means?

And Liverpool introduced the mercurial, unpredictable talents of Rosenthal into the team during the successful title run-in in 1990, and he added goals and created uncertainty in the opposition?

Are those examples of Plan B?

On Saturday, many people were complaining about the lack of substitutions, pleading for Klopp to make changes. ie Sturridge.

But bringing on a proper striker and the best finisher at the club doesn't strike me as a Plan B. If he isn't Plan A, then why is he Plan B? He doesn't add amazing height or a very different way of playing. He's not a hugely different option is he? He's just a different Plan A.

So do we actually have one? Do we need one? Or should we just accept that we aren't going to win every game, and should trust in the system and personnel we have, and fuck Plan B altogether?

 

[tony]

So do we actually have one? Do we need one? Or should we just accept that we aren't going to win every game, and should trust in the system and personnel we have, and fuck Plan B altogether?

This, we were playing well and creating good chances on Saturday. Why would you change the way we were playing on Saturday? Sometimes you just have to be patient and keep plugging away the goal may come in injury time.

 

[manwithnoname]

So do we actually have one? Do we need one? Or should we just accept that we aren't going to win every game, and should trust in the system and personnel we have, and fuck Plan B altogether?

This, we were playing well and creating good chances on Saturday. Why would you change the way we were playing on Saturday? Sometimes you just have to be patient and keep plugging away the goal may come in injury time.

Yeah, it feels like a Plan B can be just when you lash a big galoot up front for the last 5 minutes.

Sturridge isn't really a Plan B, and certainly our title-winning sides generally did exactly that: carry on, don't panic, get rewards.

I was trying to ask a wider question about commitment to a way of playing and personnel, vs the ability to make game-winning changes.

 

[Hansern]

Did we struggle to impose our game against Southampton? I thought we dominated it for nearly 90 minutes and did everything bar score a goal.
Its all well and good having the tactical flexibility if you're a goal behind etc, but I dont think that had much to do with it on Saturday.
We took a bit more risk with the Can/Studge sub though to be fair.

What we might lack at the moment is a bit more quality on the bench as a replacement or alternative for Coutinho/Mane.
Origi and Studge are obviously great cover for Firmino but Klavan, Moreno and Gruijc wouldnt really have added anything attacking wise.

 

[Mystic]

Klopp has shown he can mix things up in the past, like last season when we were playing with two up top to accommodate Origi, however at the moment I don't think we often need a plan B because our plan A is working fantastically. Besides from the Burnley game, the games where we've dropped points we've dominated the game and should have won, (Spurs, United, Southampton), our plan B if we have one is to bring Sturridge on, he brings a more immediate goal threat at the expense of overall team play, kinda similar to a Giroud I suppose, but personally I prefer to refer to him as a different option as opposed to a plan B.

 

[manwithnoname]

Yeah, there's not enough evidence so far.

What will make me reassess would be a series of results in which the opposition - like United and Southampton did - negated our game and we couldn't do much about it.

That's happened two or three times. I shall keep a count.

But I suspect it will be tried by more than a few teams between now and the end of the season. And that's when you need to look at whatever "Plan B" is, or simply look at recruiting more game-changing, clinical players who can win a game that you wouldn't otherwise, by taking one chance, or creating and taking it.

 

[Mors]

I don't think we do. They way we're playing is more than enough to win most games. We had an off-day upfront at the weekend as we missed 3 sitters, but 9 times out of 10 one of those goes in. No team wins every game all season in difficult leagues, so a 0-0 is acceptable if we can't get it over the line.
We're quarter of a way into the season under a new manager, in joint second. Lets see if at the end of the season we should have been looking at a plan B.

 

[Squiggles]

From the fans perception a plan B is usually, as you say, bringing on big, tall strong guy and throwing crosses into the box. It's not usually deployed by the best managers who often look to tweek their plan A. I can't see Klopp buying a cheaper version of Benteke. Doing so would require a winger who persistently looks to on the outside and we don't have one. Plan B then becomes quite pricey and takes up 2 options on the bench. The thinking is it's better to have your bench made up of of players who, whilst offer changes, can intergrate into the way the first eleven play.

Sturridge certainly isn't your traditional plan B striker, but he does dramatically alter how we play. He's more direct and with than more selfish. He's more likely to score an individual goal but less likely to be involved in a team goal. He hasn't been able to link up successfully with a Liverpool attack since Sterling and Suarez left. When they were here he was very much a team player as well as a top striker. There's been glipses of a partnership with Mane but he hasn't had the game time for this to develop.

For my money we're still best off trying to integrate Sturridge into this side rather than examining plan B options.

 

[FoxForceFive]

We didn't need to change the way we played on Saturday. We played fine.

It was our lack of real strength in depth that cost us. It will do so again.

Had we replacements for Lallana & Coutinho who could offer what they do, play in the same way, even at 80% of their level then we'd have won that game.

In a way it was a perfect storm, awful weather making it harder to play our usual game (the pitch was that slick a lot of our quick passing moves didn't work as well as usual), following the international break Firmino looked a little less sharp than usual, lallana was injured & Coutinho was definitely suffering a hangover of that for much of the game, & Southampton being on the back of a lot of poor results meant they weren't prepared to try to push forwards at all meaning chances weren't as prolific as usual.

I think if you remove any one of those factors then we win.

 

[davud graham]

We had enough clear cut chances to win two games on Saturday but our finishing let us down for a change.
It was disappointing but after an international break with all the travelling and fatigue involved , Lallana's Injury , the weather conditions weren't ideal and Southampton totally changing they way they've been playing in order to deny us any space and time we played quite well in the end. The only criticism was maybe Sturridge could have come on ten minutes earlier but we were still creating chances at the time so I can see why Klopp left it so long before introducing him.

 

[Hansern]

We didn't need to change the way we played on Saturday. We played fine.

It was our lack of real strength in depth that cost us. It will do so again.

Had we replacements for Lallana & Coutinho who could offer what they do, play in the same way, even at 80% of their level then we'd have won that game.

In a way it was a perfect storm, awful weather making it harder to play our usual game (the pitch was that slick a lot of our quick passing moves didn't work as well as usual), following the international break Firmino looked a little less sharp than usual, lallana was injured & Coutinho was definitely suffering a hangover of that for much of the game, & Southampton being on the back of a lot of poor results meant they weren't prepared to try to push forwards at all meaning chances weren't as prolific as usual.

I think if you remove any one of those factors then we win.

Agreed. Which makes sense when you see what type of players we are targeting for January. Promes can operate in every attacking position etc.
We need that depth and are to vulnerable at the moment if we are missing some of our key players.

 

[Modo]

We drew because we weren't good enough in front of goal. A plan B wouldn't have been necessary and I believe that's the reason Klopp didnt get Sturridge on until the 80th minute.

 

[LeTallecWiz]

Peter Crouch! 🙂

 

[manwithnoname]

I'm certainly not advocating that we sign Peter fucking Crouch!

I suppose there have been, and will be, times in which teams that win titles don't play as brilliantly as they can, and the other team are all totally on it.

Any team can lose in those circumstances, but a title-winning team finds a way to win games they should lose. That starts with the defence, and then you have to rely on that game-changer simply winning a game from nowhere. The clinical striker, like Kane, Aguero, Costa (or even Defoe) taking that ONE chance.

Or a player who can create and execute his own goals. Hazard would be a great example. Aguero also. And we have players who can do that, although perhaps not as regularly, in Mane and Coutinho.

Seems like we're all a "no" to Plan B then

EDIT: I think FFF has it right. It's just having more quality options, who can come in and ensure we stay at a very high level, rather than obviously different options.

 

[FoxForceFive]

Yeah, no plan B, just more plan A.

Plan A+.

 

[redhorizon2]

Jürgen Klopp says Liverpool cannot complain about defensive tactics
• Southampton right to try and nullify his attack in 0-0 draw, he says
• We are not weak at defending, Anfield manager adds

Jürgen Klopp was happy with what he saw in Saturday’s 0-0 draw at Southampton. Photograph: John Powell/Liverpool FC via Getty Images
Stuart James at St Mary's
@StuartJamesGNM
Sunday 20 November 2016 22.30 GMTLast modified on Sunday 20 November 2016 23.02 GMT


Jürgen Klopp said Liverpool have “nothing to moan about” after Southampton followed Manchester United’s lead by adopting a defensive approach against a side who have scored 30 Premier League goals this season. Showing little ambition to attack despite playing at home, Southampton held Liverpool to a goalless draw with the sort of tactics that Liverpool may well have to get used to as opponents try to nullify the threat of Klopp’s free-flowing team.
Far from criticising Southampton, Klopp empathised with Claude Puel, his opposite number, and admitted it would be “crazy” for teams to open up against Liverpool. The German said the onus was on Liverpool to find ways to break down obdurate opponents while retaining their concentration at the other end of the pitch – something he took encouragement from at Southampton, where Liverpool enjoyed 65% possession and were rarely troubled at the back.
“I felt we had more possession. My feeling was we had 70%, no problem,” the Liverpool manager said. “If we play this football then it would be crazy to give us space, so why would they do that? That is what we have to work on, it is our job and we have the players for it. It is never easy, you cannot only play counterattack, you cannot only play high-press, you have to prepare for everything.

Liverpool left frustrated as dogged Southampton hold on for a draw

Read more
“There is nothing to moan about, you can’t ask them: ‘Come on, give us a little more space or something?’ Before the season we had to work on this, and that is what I meant when I say we are happy with the performance against Southampton, because again we did well. It isn’t a game where you have 20 chances, we had four or five. That is more than enough, especially how big those chances were.”
It was put to Klopp that United set up with a similar mindset in the 0-0 draw at Anfield last month. “United was different. We weren’t good,” Klopp said, before reinforcing the point that he has no qualms about facing opponents who defend in numbers. “It isn’t a problem. A lot of teams play against us like this, we move on. We cannot change what other teams do.
“The only thing we have to make sure is that [failing to get a good result] isn’t because of us – that is what I am so happy about [against Southampton]. The players are concentrating, staying in games when it doesn’t work and not letting them counterattack if we defend. My favourite situation was when [Nathan] Redmond counterattacked against four Liverpool players and we got the ball back because he couldn’t see another Southampton player – that is what we have to do. We have to take the ball and try again. We cannot do any more and then we will come through. We have the quality to score.”
The clean sheet at Southampton was only Liverpool’s second of the season in the league, although Klopp feels far too much has been made of their defensive weaknesses. “When you only look at the numbers and you see 14 goals conceded, then that is obviously too much for a team like this, but look how we conceded them – three goals we conceded are from set pieces. Well, in my analysis afterwards they were offside but nobody spoke about it, just that we have a problem with set pieces.
“We always need to be cool with it, we have to work, improve, we know this. But we are able to defend. We are not weak in defending. If somebody wants to say that then do it. But I know we aren’t.”

 

[LeTallecWiz]

I'm certainly not advocating that we sign Peter fucking Crouch!

It was just a joke! 🙂

I remember we used to discuss this a lot about a team you hate - Barcelona. And how a Chelsea would frustrate them non-stop and they'd have no plan b, just more midgets tiki-taking.

That's why Luis Enrique's Barcelona - imo - is as good, if not better, than Pep's ... because they can play the tiki-taka stuff effortlessly, but they also love counter attacking football with MSN's pace and individual brilliance. I think to an extent, that system includes A + B - which is ideal.

 

[manwithnoname]

I know you were joking, tsk.

Yeah, Guardiola seemed to want a little bit of that Plan B unpredictability when he bought The Zlatan, but it soon turned out that he didn't.

And yes, I do like Barca more these days, but it is probably because Guardiola isn't there, and Suarez is.

 

[mom]

Plan b is studge. He just needs to come on earlier to be an effective plan b.

 

[manwithnoname]

Plan b is studge. He just needs to come on earlier to be an effective plan b.

Yeah, I suppose. But bringing him on doesn't really change the way we play, or the threat.

He's certainly greedier than Firmino, a better finisher and quicker (unless he really has lost all of his pace), but if the way we play suits Firmino more, and that interplay with the other AMs, then Sturridge isn't really a Plan B, because we haven't adapted or adjusted to him, he's just on the pitch.

 

[dee]

Plan b is studge. He just needs to come on earlier to be an effective plan b.

I think, as everyone has said already, Sturridge isn't Plan B he's just a variant of A. When he came on Firminho dropped back.

A real plan B would be to shift formation, say to a 4-4-2 or to a 3-4-3.

 

[dee]

Yeah, there's not enough evidence so far.

What will make me reassess would be a series of results in which the opposition - like United and Southampton did - negated our game and we couldn't do much about it

I don't think Southampton did negate our game. We had several clear goal scoring chances and should have taken them. The Southampton DM was key to keeping us at bay for much of the game but we always looked liked scoring. United DID completely shut us down.

 

[hmmmmm1]

We need a bigger squad if we want to compete.

Hopefully Jan / summer should fix a few of these issues.

 

[manwithnoname]

I don't think Southampton did negate our game. We had several clear goal scoring chances and should have taken them. The Southampton DM was key to keeping us at bay for much of the game but we always looked liked scoring. United DID completely shut us down.

It felt like we didn't create as many chances as we normally do.

We play a game that usually delivers an avalanche of chances, more than any other side. And we need to create that amount, because we aren't clinical in taking them.

Didn't seem as if we had that many really. Mane with a couple, Firmino and Coutinho only had one good chance each.

 

[hmmmmm1]

We tend to get more chances once we score as the other team has to open up.

It is useful question because teams like boro game plan will be to put 11 men behind the ball and hope to nick a goal.

 

[cloggypop]

Our lack of clinical finishing is a myth

http://www.transfermarkt.com/premier-league/chancenverwertung/wettbewerb/GB1

 

[tony]

[QUOTE="manwithnoname, post: 1513957, member: 1731"]It felt like we didn't create as many chances as we normally do.

We play a game that usually delivers an avalanche of chances, more than any other side. And we need to create that amount, because we aren't clinical in taking them.

Didn't seem as if we had that many really. Mane with a couple, Firmino and Coutinho only had one good chance each.[/QUOTE]

Not in the first half but I thought we were really good in the second, 15 shots in an away game is ok and denied a stonewall peno too. ( You missed Clyne's sitter and Can should have done better too )

 

[Frogfish]

We had enough clear cut chances to win two games on Saturday but our finishing let us down for a change.
It was disappointing but after an international break with all the travelling and fatigue involved , Lallana's Injury , the weather conditions weren't ideal and Southampton totally changing they way they've been playing in order to deny us any space and time we played quite well in the end. The only criticism was maybe Sturridge could have come on ten minutes earlier but we were still creating chances at the time so I can see why Klopp left it so long before introducing him.

In a nutshell, spot on.

 

[Frogfish]

I don't think Southampton did negate our game. We had several clear goal scoring chances and should have taken them. The Southampton DM was key to keeping us at bay for much of the game but we always looked liked scoring. United DID completely shut us down.

Took the words out of my mouth ... to the letter.

 

[Frogfish]

Not in the first half but I thought we were really good in the second, 15 shots in an away game is ok and denied a stonewall peno too. ( You missed Clyne's sitter and Can should have done better too)

Agree with the rest but it was never in a million years a penalty ... Van Dijk clearly started pulling Firmino back from a yard or two outside the box.