Liverpool F.c.

[rott]

i've read moneyball recently and it is fascinating. if the theories which have worked at the red sox can be put into practice successfully in football it will be really interesting to watch.

Do you buy many Books about the Oakland Athletics or Baseball in general then Stevie ??

nope. bought it because of our new owners and wanted to know more.

Of course you did

Cos if i wanted to buy a Book to know more about Gold & Sullivan, i'd buy a Book on Newcastle, yeah..

Moneyball has little or nothing to do with the Owners of the Boston Red Sox..

Sounds good though stevie, i'll give you that..

You all sound so articulate & smart you Liverpool Supporters nowadays, what with your " Stats " & " Commodoties " & all that, it's incresdibly impressive..

Bwah.

Singho you have a very good point, <deleted> are those three kopites on about?

StevieH we know of old. R123 tries to appear erudite but lets himself down because he can't spell organisation or glimpses. I'll say nothing about Abrak, that post of his says it all--he deserves to have it put on a t-shirt and be made to wear it in the alehouse. Three refugees from guardian online or what?

But mustn't get carried away or I'll have a certain much-loved and well-respected colonial, ManUre fanatic, (who's never been near the place) accusing me of making personal attacks. Can you believe it.

Sorry, forgot about Devil and his minging f...ing 'jokes'.

Edited February 7, 2011 by rott

[MSingh]

Steve, have I gone well past the point of replying to Singh's posts where I appear to be actually foolish. Bill James is employed by the Red Sox and was Jhenry's almost first appointment. I think that moneyball was written at about the sametime that Henry acquired the Red Sox. So dont worry Singh is having a conversation with himself.

I deleted the rest as it was a pile of statistical w*nk completely irrelevent to our beautiful Game..

However, that Book Moneyball is about the Oakland Athletic's & their General Manager, it is NOT a Book soemone would say they bought because of the new Liverpool Owners & wanting to learn more about them.

Bill James wrote a Series of Books called " Baseball Abstract ", a series of Books that greatly influenced the A's General Manager, but to say the Book is about the Red Sox is laughable & COMPLETELY muggy..

Are you going to say i'm wrong on that too &/or " incredibly <deleted> arrogant ", or even " stupid ", like you did last night ??

Liar's Liar's Bums on Fires..

I don't mean you Abrak, if your Bum was on Fire you'd probably revert to the statistical analysis of which is better to put it, by sitting on a Toilet or jumping in a Swimming Pool which, by the time you've worked it out, you'd be Brown Bread..

How long have you studied Soccer anyway Abrak ??

Sabermetrics has NO place in our beautiful Game & you people have gone to new levels of ridiculousness by even acknowledging that it could..

No wonder the Game is going down the fcukign drain with people like you & your awful " win at all costs " attitudes, supporting it.

[MSingh]

Sorry, forgot about Devil and his minging f...ing 'jokes'.

The sickest thing about that Rott is that he would have actually, definately, without a doubt, laughed a lot at that last joke too, trust me..

[carmine]

Well done Liverpool.

Amazing how king kenny has them playing and their win against Chelsea was merited. Great organization and tactically astute, plus saw glimses of some of the great Liverpool teams from the past. What a difference after the clueless and useless Hodgson.

Also I guess the Chelsea manager was under pressure from his Chairman to play the 50 million pound man. More like 50 pence.The irony is that the presence of you know likely disrupted the team and contributed to the defeat.

Have to remember it was the Chelsea Chairman who single handedly got rid of who some say is perhaps the worlds best manager.

This is what happens when people with more money than sense are allowed to dictate or interfere in team matters etc.

Anyway: with these performances not long before Liverpool are top 4 at least!

Firstly, it was a gritty, tactically well thought out performance on Sunday and i take nothing away from your team.

however, to start drawing comparisons with this lot and the great Liverpool teams of the past, is one of the most toss statements i've heard on here, and would have Bob Paisley turning in his grave.

I understand that you are all in a state of delirium but for christs sake try and keep it a little real.

If anyones interested, Liars Poker, written by Michael Lewis is a really good read, but again, on the subject of this author, what has Moneyball actually got to do with your owners?

[MSingh]

Well done Liverpool.

Amazing how king kenny has them playing and their win against Chelsea was merited. Great organization and tactically astute, plus saw glimses of some of the great Liverpool teams from the past. What a difference after the clueless and useless Hodgson.

Also I guess the Chelsea manager was under pressure from his Chairman to play the 50 million pound man. More like 50 pence.The irony is that the presence of you know likely disrupted the team and contributed to the defeat.

Have to remember it was the Chelsea Chairman who single handedly got rid of who some say is perhaps the worlds best manager.

This is what happens when people with more money than sense are allowed to dictate or interfere in team matters etc.

Anyway: with these performances not long before Liverpool are top 4 at least!

Firstly, it was a gritty, tactically well thought out performance on Sunday and i take nothing away from your team.

however, to start drawing comparisons with this lot and the great Liverpool teams of the past, is one of the most toss statements i've heard on here, and would have Bob Paisley turning in his grave.

I understand that you are all in a state of delirium but for christs sake try and keep it a little real.

If anyones interested, Liars Poker, written by Michael Lewis is a really good read, but again, on the subject of this author, what has Moneyball actually got to do with your owners?

More chance of keeping it real in your thread than this one from what i've read on here in the past few Months

& don't go there with regards to Moneyball, the silence says it all.

P*ss Poor..

That's me done on it anyway, point proven for all to see.

[Abrak]

The central premise of Moneyball is that the collected wisdom of baseball insiders (including players, managers, coaches, scouts, and the front office) over the past century is subjective and often flawed From Wikipedia line 1.

The firm's management methods make mechanical, non-discretionary trading decisions in response to systematic determinations of reversals in each market's direction, with the explicit intention of precluding not only human emotion, but also any subjective evaluation of such things as the so-called fundamentals, to trigger each decision to be long or short each market, or not. From Wikipedia J W Henry's trading firms philosophy of how to make money in commodities.

Sabermetrics is simply an analytical tool. So as Stevie H put it he read the put to get a better understanding of how our owners think.

That is the relevence. Point proven move on. If you happen to believe it is all crap that is merely a subjective statement of opinion.

Edited February 8, 2011 by Abrak

[smokie36]

The central premise of Moneyball is that the collected wisdom of baseball insiders (including players, managers, coaches, scouts, and the front office) over the past century is subjective and often flawed From Wikipedia line 1.

The firm's management methods make mechanical, non-discretionary trading decisions in response to systematic determinations of reversals in each market's direction, with the explicit intention of precluding not only human emotion, but also any subjective evaluation of such things as the so-called fundamentals, to trigger each decision to be long or short each market, or not. From Wikipedia J W Henry's trading firms philosophy of how to make money in commodities.

Sabermetrics is simply an analytical tool. So as Stevie H put it he read the put to get a better understanding of how our owners think.

That is the relevence. Point proven move on. If you happen to believe it is all crap that is merely a subjective statement of opinion.

What a <deleted> laugh.....yeah buy young players with a sell on value.....sell them at their peak.....chairman has no emotional ties.....and on and on.....where is Stevie to tell us the ins and outs of this? I'd still like to know the finer points of the sabermetric approach though and has King Kenny been studying through the Open University as well?

Seems you can try to justify any old cobblers here but on this issue red tinted moustached perm lovers you are walking alone.

[smokie36]

Maybe Stevie has busily got his nose in a book and will get back to us shortly eh?

[MSingh]

The central premise of Moneyball is that the collected wisdom of baseball insiders (including players, managers, coaches, scouts, and the front office) over the past century is subjective and often flawed From Wikipedia line 1.

The firm's management methods make mechanical, non-discretionary trading decisions in response to systematic determinations of reversals in each market's direction, with the explicit intention of precluding not only human emotion, but also any subjective evaluation of such things as the so-called fundamentals, to trigger each decision to be long or short each market, or not. From Wikipedia J W Henry's trading firms philosophy of how to make money in commodities.

Sabermetrics is simply an analytical tool. So as Stevie H put it he read the put to get a better understanding of how our owners think.

That is the relevence. Point proven move on. If you happen to believe it is all crap that is merely a subjective statement of opinion.

That's it, put your fingers in your Ears whilst whistling, close your eyes & the questions go away..

Good one Abrak, top Bombing..

[BIGTOE3]

The central premise of Moneyball is that the collected wisdom of baseball insiders (including players, managers, coaches, scouts, and the front office) over the past century is subjective and often flawed From Wikipedia line 1.

The firm's management methods make mechanical, non-discretionary trading decisions in response to systematic determinations of reversals in each market's direction, with the explicit intention of precluding not only human emotion, but also any subjective evaluation of such things as the so-called fundamentals, to trigger each decision to be long or short each market, or not. From Wikipedia J W Henry's trading firms philosophy of how to make money in commodities.

Sabermetrics is simply an analytical tool. So as Stevie H put it he read the put to get a better understanding of how our owners think.

That is the relevence. Point proven move on. If you happen to believe it is all crap that is merely a subjective statement of opinion.

That's it, put your fingers in your Ears whilst whistling, close your eyes & the questions go away..

Good one Abrak, top Bombing..

Give it a rest Singy your ranting is just plain BORING

You have over 5,600 posts in 3 years go get a life - Liverpool is NOT even YOUR team.

BT

[MSingh]

The central premise of Moneyball is that the collected wisdom of baseball insiders (including players, managers, coaches, scouts, and the front office) over the past century is subjective and often flawed From Wikipedia line 1.

The firm's management methods make mechanical, non-discretionary trading decisions in response to systematic determinations of reversals in each market's direction, with the explicit intention of precluding not only human emotion, but also any subjective evaluation of such things as the so-called fundamentals, to trigger each decision to be long or short each market, or not. From Wikipedia J W Henry's trading firms philosophy of how to make money in commodities.

Sabermetrics is simply an analytical tool. So as Stevie H put it he read the put to get a better understanding of how our owners think.

That is the relevence. Point proven move on. If you happen to believe it is all crap that is merely a subjective statement of opinion.

That's it, put your fingers in your Ears whilst whistling, close your eyes & the questions go away..

Good one Abrak, top Bombing..

Give it a rest Singy your ranting is just plain BORING

You have over 5,600 posts in 3 years go get a life - Liverpool is NOT even YOUR team.

BT

Sweetcheeks i've got 2 words for you, i don't need to Post them though..

Next time i'm up in Bangers i'll drop into the Crossbar on a Football night, buy you a Beer & then you can tell me to get a life instead of you doing it from behind a Computer screen..

Edited February 8, 2011 by MSingh

[BIGTOE3]

The central premise of Moneyball is that the collected wisdom of baseball insiders (including players, managers, coaches, scouts, and the front office) over the past century is subjective and often flawed From Wikipedia line 1.

The firm's management methods make mechanical, non-discretionary trading decisions in response to systematic determinations of reversals in each market's direction, with the explicit intention of precluding not only human emotion, but also any subjective evaluation of such things as the so-called fundamentals, to trigger each decision to be long or short each market, or not. From Wikipedia J W Henry's trading firms philosophy of how to make money in commodities.

Sabermetrics is simply an analytical tool. So as Stevie H put it he read the put to get a better understanding of how our owners think.

That is the relevence. Point proven move on. If you happen to believe it is all crap that is merely a subjective statement of opinion.

That's it, put your fingers in your Ears whilst whistling, close your eyes & the questions go away..

Good one Abrak, top Bombing..

Give it a rest Singy your ranting is just plain BORING

You have over 5,600 posts in 3 years go get a life - Liverpool is NOT even YOUR team.

BT

Sweetcheeks i've got 2 words for you, i don't need to Post them though..

Next time i'm up in Bangers i'll drop into the Crossbar on a Football night, buy you a Beer & then you can tell me to get a life instead of you doing it from behind a Computer screen..

No problem, will look forwardto your vist UNTIL THEN hope rantings stop.

BT

[MSingh]

That's it, put your fingers in your Ears whilst whistling, close your eyes & the questions go away..

Good one Abrak, top Bombing..

Give it a rest Singy your ranting is just plain BORING

You have over 5,600 posts in 3 years go get a life - Liverpool is NOT even YOUR team.

BT

Sweetcheeks i've got 2 words for you, i don't need to Post them though..

Next time i'm up in Bangers i'll drop into the Crossbar on a Football night, buy you a Beer & then you can tell me to get a life instead of you doing it from behind a Computer screen..

No problem, will look forwardto your vist UNTIL THEN hope calling people out on bullsh*t comments stop.

BT

I just amended it a little..

[BIGTOE3]

That's it, put your fingers in your Ears whilst whistling, close your eyes & the questions go away..

Good one Abrak, top Bombing..

Give it a rest Singy your ranting is just plain BORING

You have over 5,600 posts in 3 years go get a life - Liverpool is NOT even YOUR team.

BT

Sweetcheeks i've got 2 words for you, i don't need to Post them though..

Next time i'm up in Bangers i'll drop into the Crossbar on a Football night, buy you a Beer & then you can tell me to get a life instead of you doing it from behind a Computer screen..

No problem, will look forwardto your vist UNTIL THEN hope calling people out on bullsh*t comments stop.

BT

I just amended it a little..

Don't think the Mods will be happy with you amending someone else's Post I THINK AGAINST THE RULES

BT :jap:

[BangrakBob]

That signing of Hodgson is proving pretty useful eh chaps. Still, no doubt all the credit goes to Kenny.

Wonder what's going on over on the Chelsea thread? Imagine with their massive new signings and the importance of the game they just played, they'll be a frenzy of postings from their legion of Thai based support as they toss back and forth matters relating to the future of their club.

that signing of hodgson's who hodgson admitted publicly that he didn't know what position the player played in. so stuck him out on the right wing.

playing in his proper position under dalglish he's now scored four goals in five games. go figure.

I think Hodgson's public admission tells you although in person he signed Meireles he was Rafa's man and Rafa would have done a lot of leg work on that deal before he parted, at least one positive he left us with

YNWA

[rixalex]

That signing of Hodgson is proving pretty useful eh chaps. Still, no doubt all the credit goes to Kenny.

Wonder what's going on over on the Chelsea thread? Imagine with their massive new signings and the importance of the game they just played, they'll be a frenzy of postings from their legion of Thai based support as they toss back and forth matters relating to the future of their club.

that signing of hodgson's who hodgson admitted publicly that he didn't know what position the player played in. so stuck him out on the right wing.

playing in his proper position under dalglish he's now scored four goals in five games. go figure.

I think Hodgson's public admission tells you although in person he signed Meireles he was Rafa's man and Rafa would have done a lot of leg work on that deal before he parted, at least one positive he left us with

YNWA

You guys are choosing to interpret "i don't know the player's best position" as "i'm stupid and clueless about football" whereas others might interpret it more along the lines of "the lad is very versatile, and can play in a number of positions - which one suits him and the team best we need a little more time to assess".

Oh, and "at least one positive"??? You want to be careful. You'll have Rafa's army on your back with a comment like that!

[BangrakBob]

That signing of Hodgson is proving pretty useful eh chaps. Still, no doubt all the credit goes to Kenny.

Wonder what's going on over on the Chelsea thread? Imagine with their massive new signings and the importance of the game they just played, they'll be a frenzy of postings from their legion of Thai based support as they toss back and forth matters relating to the future of their club.

that signing of hodgson's who hodgson admitted publicly that he didn't know what position the player played in. so stuck him out on the right wing.

playing in his proper position under dalglish he's now scored four goals in five games. go figure.

I think Hodgson's public admission tells you although in person he signed Meireles he was Rafa's man and Rafa would have done a lot of leg work on that deal before he parted, at least one positive he left us with

YNWA

You guys are choosing to interpret "i don't know the player's best position" as "i'm stupid and clueless about football" whereas others might interpret it more along the lines of "the lad is very versatile, and can play in a number of positions - which one suits him and the team best we need a little more time to assess".

Oh, and "at least one positive"??? You want to be careful. You'll have Rafa's army on your back with a comment like that!

haha yeah I only found this forum today, didn't know it was here. I did think twice about the "positive" comment , especially without earning my LFC forum comment stripes as yet.

[carmine]

That signing of Hodgson is proving pretty useful eh chaps. Still, no doubt all the credit goes to Kenny.

Wonder what's going on over on the Chelsea thread? Imagine with their massive new signings and the importance of the game they just played, they'll be a frenzy of postings from their legion of Thai based support as they toss back and forth matters relating to the future of their club.

that signing of hodgson's who hodgson admitted publicly that he didn't know what position the player played in. so stuck him out on the right wing.

playing in his proper position under dalglish he's now scored four goals in five games. go figure.

I think Hodgson's public admission tells you although in person he signed Meireles he was Rafa's man and Rafa would have done a lot of leg work on that deal before he parted, at least one positive he left us with

YNWA

And yes, there we go.....back to Rafa again...love Rafa, want Rafa, yadda yadda yadda......MANLOVE

[StevieH]

That signing of Hodgson is proving pretty useful eh chaps. Still, no doubt all the credit goes to Kenny.

Wonder what's going on over on the Chelsea thread? Imagine with their massive new signings and the importance of the game they just played, they'll be a frenzy of postings from their legion of Thai based support as they toss back and forth matters relating to the future of their club.

that signing of hodgson's who hodgson admitted publicly that he didn't know what position the player played in. so stuck him out on the right wing.

playing in his proper position under dalglish he's now scored four goals in five games. go figure.

I think Hodgson's public admission tells you although in person he signed Meireles he was Rafa's man and Rafa would have done a lot of leg work on that deal before he parted, at least one positive he left us with

YNWA

You guys are choosing to interpret "i don't know the player's best position" as "i'm stupid and clueless about football" whereas others might interpret it more along the lines of "the lad is very versatile, and can play in a number of positions - which one suits him and the team best we need a little more time to assess".

Oh, and "at least one positive"??? You want to be careful. You'll have Rafa's army on your back with a comment like that!

interpreting nothing rix, hodgson stuck meireles out on the right wing, he was poor. he gets played in the middle with a license to support the forward, he's on four goals in five games. meireles has played centrally his entire career.

[rixalex]

interpreting nothing rix, hodgson stuck meireles out on the right wing, he was poor. he gets played in the middle with a license to support the forward, he's on four goals in five games. meireles has played centrally his entire career.

I think using the term "admitted publicly", is putting it in your own negative context. It suggests what he was saying was something shameful that made him look foolish and that he would have rather kept private. That's fine, but that's your opinion. I think Hodgson's opinion would have been not that he was saying something shameful, but that he was simply complimenting the player by declaring him to be useful in more than one position.

[StevieH]

interpreting nothing rix, hodgson stuck meireles out on the right wing, he was poor. he gets played in the middle with a license to support the forward, he's on four goals in five games. meireles has played centrally his entire career.

I think using the term "admitted publicly", is putting it in your own negative context. It suggests what he was saying was something shameful that made him look foolish and that he would have rather kept private. That's fine, but that's your opinion. I think Hodgson's opinion would have been not that he was saying something shameful, but that he was simply complimenting the player by declaring him to be useful in more than one position.

it isn't my opinion. hodgson stated in a press conference 'we'll get more out of him once we work out what his best position is'. meireles has played as a box to box central midfielder his entire career. there was nothing to work out. apart from the fact that he was a fish out of water on the right wing.

[smokie36]

Its a bit of a soap opera in here aint it? Say....ohhh....maybe Dallas you know the one where a whole series was a dream....know what I mean like?

[rixalex]

it isn't my opinion. hodgson stated in a press conference 'we'll get more out of him once we work out what his best position is'. meireles has played as a box to box central midfielder his entire career. there was nothing to work out. apart from the fact that he was a fish out of water on the right wing.

The wording "admitted publicly" reflects your opinion, that he was owning up to something that was embarrassing. I don't think that's how he felt, otherwise he would have kept it private.

I think it's more likely that contrary to what you believe, Hodgson didn't think that simply because a player has played in one position all his career, it's a given that that is the only position he can be played in. Perhaps in the case of Meireles, he can only play in one position - the evidence of what we have seen at Liverpool would indeed seem to support that - but not all players are this way and there are many examples of players who, having been moved to a new position by a new manager, have enjoyed greater success.

OK, in this case it might not have worked out - we'll never know 100% for sure because Hodgson wasn't given enough games, in my opinion - but my points remain:

1) simply playing a player in a different position than they are used to doesn't make the manager a fool - indeed in some cases it makes them a genius. Thierry Henry anybody?

2) Meireles was Hodgson's signing, and some credit should be given to him for bringing him in to the team. I haven't seen any whatsoever, not from Liverpool supporters anyway.

[BangrakBob]

That signing of Hodgson is proving pretty useful eh chaps. Still, no doubt all the credit goes to Kenny.

Wonder what's going on over on the Chelsea thread? Imagine with their massive new signings and the importance of the game they just played, they'll be a frenzy of postings from their legion of Thai based support as they toss back and forth matters relating to the future of their club.

that signing of hodgson's who hodgson admitted publicly that he didn't know what position the player played in. so stuck him out on the right wing.

playing in his proper position under dalglish he's now scored four goals in five games. go figure.

I think Hodgson's public admission tells you although in person he signed Meireles he was Rafa's man and Rafa would have done a lot of leg work on that deal before he parted, at least one positive he left us with

YNWA

And yes, there we go.....back to Rafa again...love Rafa, want Rafa, yadda yadda yadda......MANLOVE

Think you might of got me wrong there Carmine, I'm far from a Rafa loyalist

[Abrak]

One of the advantages of having the club heading in the right direction is that we dont have to discuss Hodgson and Rafa anymore. Actually there really is nothing left to debate.

Anyway lets move onto the present and start talking about our current and future manager.

You should also remember that our owners are objective people who utilize subjective psychology. Now by that if you think about management it isnt or shouldnt be just about results. What the owners I believe value most in a manager is stability - this is good because Liverpool's fans want that too. Secondly it is the role of the manager to get the best out of the players to keep the support onside and to keep the owners onside. The key to stability is that when the results are actually not good the fans dont 'call for change'.

Now if you look at Kenny objectively you have to admit he had a huge advantage starting after Hodgson. The supporters were bound to be on side. Moral was bound to improve. The way Stevie makes it sound, even getting an improved performance out of the team was relatively simple (have players playing the right position). But they were likely to play better from the mood swing. However he cant be expected to do much more. And Liverpool knew he was the right manager for them at the right time and the fact that people disagreed makes it all the better.

One big advantage that Kenny has is that he is very level headed. As I say I dont really understand football but I thought it 'odd' about Hodgson's tactics is that he played 'negative football' and the team let in so many goals (while I thought the object of negative football was the opposite.) And the remarkable thing in Liverpool's turn of form is that they are now keeping clean sheets. (I know it is a statement of the obvious but if you look at Liverpool's away record of conceding 21 goals in their first 11 games and Chelsea's home record of conceding 7 goals in their first 11 games it does show that it is not simply a game of scoring more goals.) My point is Steve Clarke (who I believe we were also told we were mad to hire) must have done something here and Kenny is the first to acknowledge it.

My point is this. People like StevieH should be careful about trying to constantly prove that Hodgson is a bad manager when they actually know he is simply the 'wrong' manager for Liverpool in the first place. I am not trying to defend Hodgson I judged him the day he walked through the door. But I can see a high degree of statisical bias in fans criticism. By that I mean I genuinely do not believe that say StevieH would actually believe he was the right manager for Liverpool even if we were in the top 4.

Where this is important is that FSG will not appoint Kenny is he is seen as the opposite, a manager with a magic wand because he clearly doesnt have one. He is Liverpool FC and he doesnt even wish to be the best manager but he wants the best for Liverpool.

So the important questions are if we were 3rd would Liverpool fans think that Hodgson was the 'right' manager?

If we had a bad run of form and Kenny is the manager do we change the manager?

[Abrak]

it isn't my opinion. hodgson stated in a press conference 'we'll get more out of him once we work out what his best position is'. meireles has played as a box to box central midfielder his entire career. there was nothing to work out. apart from the fact that he was a fish out of water on the right wing.

The wording "admitted publicly" reflects your opinion, that he was owning up to something that was embarrassing. I don't think that's how he felt, otherwise he would have kept it private.

I think it's more likely that contrary to what you believe, Hodgson didn't think that simply because a player has played in one position all his career, it's a given that that is the only position he can be played in. Perhaps in the case of Meireles, he can only play in one position - the evidence of what we have seen at Liverpool would indeed seem to support that - but not all players are this way and there are many examples of players who, having been moved to a new position by a new manager, have enjoyed greater success.

OK, in this case it might not have worked out - we'll never know 100% for sure because Hodgson wasn't given enough games, in my opinion - but my points remain:

This is a classic pointless Hodgson/Liverpool debate because Liverpool fans use exactly the same logic to argue the opposite.

You see the argument goes that Hodgson as a new manager chose to in this case 'play a versatile player out of position' or in another argument 'new tactics'. Obviously these new ideas are foreign to the players and may be disruptive at first and will obviously take time to get used to. But it doesnt mean they are not good ideas or good tactics. In fact we will never know because Hodgson was not given enough games.

As a line of argument I would have thought it was obviously true. Six months is unlikely to be a long enough time to judge a new system. But the amount of time (no idea how long) has to be finite on the basis that in the long run we are all dead. So let us assume the right amount of time is 18 months (simply on the basis that you might also need to change some players to go with your new tactics.)

Now Liverpool fans argument is this. Hodgson was appointed a caretaker manager while the club was being sold. He was then retained as caretaker manager while the new owners looked for a permanent manager. Even if he was appointed permanent he intended to leave after two and a half years to get the England job. Now on the basis that 'new tactics' are 'disruptive' or that the fruits of playing a player out of position may take 18 months to bear fruit by which time he wasnt going to be around and a new manager was going to come in and start the process all over a again - Hodgson had absolutely no right to be screwing around with tactics and players positions for long term benefit when he wasnt going to be around in the long term. In fact the precise 'amount of time' a caretaker manager should be given experimenting with tactics and players out of position should in theory be '0' days.

He was specifically appointed essentially to be a 'safe pair of hands' during a transitional period at the club - to keep the club steady while it was being sorted out. He was not employed to disrupt the club by implementing his own long term management philosophy.

[JacknDanny]

it isn't my opinion. hodgson stated in a press conference 'we'll get more out of him once we work out what his best position is'. meireles has played as a box to box central midfielder his entire career. there was nothing to work out. apart from the fact that he was a fish out of water on the right wing.

The wording "admitted publicly" reflects your opinion, that he was owning up to something that was embarrassing. I don't think that's how he felt, otherwise he would have kept it private.

I think it's more likely that contrary to what you believe, Hodgson didn't think that simply because a player has played in one position all his career, it's a given that that is the only position he can be played in. Perhaps in the case of Meireles, he can only play in one position - the evidence of what we have seen at Liverpool would indeed seem to support that - but not all players are this way and there are many examples of players who, having been moved to a new position by a new manager, have enjoyed greater success.

OK, in this case it might not have worked out - we'll never know 100% for sure because Hodgson wasn't given enough games, in my opinion - but my points remain:

This is a classic pointless Hodgson/Liverpool debate because Liverpool fans use exactly the same logic to argue the opposite.

You see the argument goes that Hodgson as a new manager chose to in this case 'play a versatile player out of position' or in another argument 'new tactics'. Obviously these new ideas are foreign to the players and may be disruptive at first and will obviously take time to get used to. But it doesnt mean they are not good ideas or good tactics. In fact we will never know because Hodgson was not given enough games.

As a line of argument I would have thought it was obviously true. Six months is unlikely to be a long enough time to judge a new system. But the amount of time (no idea how long) has to be finite on the basis that in the long run we are all dead. So let us assume the right amount of time is 18 months (simply on the basis that you might also need to change some players to go with your new tactics.)

Now Liverpool fans argument is this. Hodgson was appointed a caretaker manager while the club was being sold. He was then retained as caretaker manager while the new owners looked for a permanent manager. Even if he was appointed permanent he intended to leave after two and a half years to get the England job. Now on the basis that 'new tactics' are 'disruptive' or that the fruits of playing a player out of position may take 18 months to bear fruit by which time he wasnt going to be around and a new manager was going to come in and start the process all over a again - Hodgson had absolutely no right to be screwing around with tactics and players positions for long term benefit when he wasnt going to be around in the long term. In fact the precise 'amount of time' a caretaker manager should be given experimenting with tactics and players out of position should in theory be '0' days.

He was specifically appointed essentially to be a 'safe pair of hands' during a transitional period at the club - to keep the club steady while it was being sorted out. He was not employed to disrupt the club by implementing his own long term management philosophy.

Hey Abrak, you really do follow the policy of why use 3 words when 1001 will do!!!

To be honest, I dont know if you are making a good point or not, my attention span doesnt normally last to the end of the post. But it looks good on paper

[rixalex]

Hey Abrak, you really do follow the policy of why use 3 words when 1001 will do!!!

To be honest, I dont know if you are making a good point or not, my attention span doesnt normally last to the end of the post. But it looks good on paper

On a recent trip down to a bar on Sukhumvit, i drove down the wrong soi. It turned out to be one-way and went on for what seemed like miles. I turned off it into a soi that seemed to be heading back in the right direction, but it narrowed down to about the size of a footpath and took me on a myriad of tight twists and turns. I thought i would never get out. When i finally arrived at the bar it was close to closing, i was exhausted and had forgotten why i even went there in the first place. Was it to meet to meet a girl or meet a mate? Or had i gone there just for a quiet beer? <deleted> if i knew.

[JacknDanny]

Hey Abrak, you really do follow the policy of why use 3 words when 1001 will do!!!

To be honest, I dont know if you are making a good point or not, my attention span doesnt normally last to the end of the post. But it looks good on paper

On a recent trip down to a bar on Sukhumvit, i drove down the wrong soi. It turned out to be one-way and went on for what seemed like miles. I turned off it into a soi that seemed to be heading back in the right direction, but it narrowed down to about the size of a footpath and took me on a myriad of tight twists and turns. I thought i would never get out. When i finally arrived at the bar it was close to closing, i was exhausted and had forgotten why i even went there in the first place. Was it to meet to meet a girl or meet a mate? Or had i gone there just for a quiet beer? <deleted> if i knew.

I am sure that there is a mathematical or statistical equation, that you could have used to save you all that trouble!! Or is there? Theres got to be a book on it somewhere!

[smokie36]

Hey Abrak, you really do follow the policy of why use 3 words when 1001 will do!!!

To be honest, I dont know if you are making a good point or not, my attention span doesnt normally last to the end of the post. But it looks good on paper

On a recent trip down to a bar on Sukhumvit, i drove down the wrong soi. It turned out to be one-way and went on for what seemed like miles. I turned off it into a soi that seemed to be heading back in the right direction, but it narrowed down to about the size of a footpath and took me on a myriad of tight twists and turns. I thought i would never get out. When i finally arrived at the bar it was close to closing, i was exhausted and had forgotten why i even went there in the first place. Was it to meet to meet a girl or meet a mate? Or had i gone there just for a quiet beer? <deleted> if i knew.

I am sure that there is a mathematical or statistical equation, that you could have used to save you all that trouble!! Or is there? Theres got to be a book on it somewhere!

Good collar Sarge!

Edited February 10, 2011 by smokie36