Both have underachieved since about 1990, and both have had a succession of top class managers. For Liverpool, they saw Gerard Houllier – who oversaw the generation of French stars who won the World Cup in 1998 and almost repeated the feat in 2006 – replaced by the coach who last prevented Real Madrid or Barcelona from winning La Liga, Rafa Benitez. Then in came Roy Hodgson, a coach with a track record of getting the most out of the teams he has managed over the years, and memorably took Fulham to the Europa League final last season.
There is a school of thought that Liverpool’s failings in recent years have been down to lack of quality in the squad, and today many readily assume that the side is weaker than those clubs who are now fighting over their top four place; Tottenham and Manchester City. This is an argument that is difficult to accept when you look in closer detail at the respective sides. In Pepe Reina and Fernando Torres, many neutrals would argue that Liverpool have both the league’s best goalkeeper and best striker. Jamie Carragher may have seen better days but alongside Martin Skrtel or Sotiris Kyrgiakos he forms a reasonably strong defence, certainly as strong as those of City or Tottenham. Paul Konchesky might not be high on the list of Premier League full backs, but neither are Alan Hutton or Benoit Assou-Ekotto, and Spurs are doing well.
In midfield, it would be debatable whether Raul Mereiles, Steven Gerrard, Christian Poulsen, Lucas and Joe Cole could be said to be the lesser of Tottenham’s Luka Modric, Rafa van der Vaart, Tom Huddlestone, Wilson Palacios and Aaron Lennon, or of Manchester City’s Yaya Touré, Gareth Barry, Adam Johnson, Nigel de Jong and David Silva. And up front Fernando Torres are far better than any of the Tottenham strikers. So the problems Liverpool face cannot be about the quality of the players.
Whatever one thinks of Houllier, Benitez and now Hodgson, the statistics and achievements of the trio speak for themselves. It is not a situation dissimilar to that of England, who have under-achieved with the likes of Glenn Hoddle, Sven-Goran Eriksson and Fabio Capello at the helm. The records of these managers, particularly Capello, demonstrate that they are successful managers with the ability to produce winning teams. Yet England, like Liverpool, have become perennial failures. It is reasonable to say Liverpool’s problems are not about the managers. So what is really wrong with Liverpool?
It would be easy to point at the troubles at boardroom level in recent times, with the now departed Tom Hicks and George Gillett taking much of the blame for the problems at Liverpool in the past. But with John Henry now in charge, a shrewd and intelligent businessman and owner of the Boston Red Sox, there is finally peace at the upper echelons of the Anfield hierarchy.
The explanation seems to lie in the nature of the players at the disposal of the Liverpool managers, particularly Benitez and Hodgson. Steven Gerrard epitomises much of what is wrong with Liverpool and England. A brilliant player on his day, and if you were relying on one player to get you out of a hole in a game, Gerrard would probably be at the top of the list. But gifted as he is, Gerrard is notoriously poor at adhering to tactical instructions. This is why both Rafa Benitez and Fabio Capello have tried playing him out wide on the left, a position which requires less tactical instruction and more improvisation. Joe Cole is another who is less able to adapt tactically, which is why the heavily tactical Italian coaching styles of Carlo Ancelotti and Capello have not suited him, and is the reason Ancelotti cited for swapping Cole for Yossi Benayoun this summer.
Under Benitez, Liverpool last year conceded numerous goals from set pieces, as a result of the zonal marking system the Spaniard employed. But zonal marking is proven to be more effective than man marking. Man marking is a reactive system – following a particular runner, whereas zonal marking sees defenders taking charge of an area, and if the ball enters that area, they attack it and prevent it getting to a striker. It is a more pro-active and effective system, but it requires tactical discipline. Liverpool’s failings at set plays owes more to the tactical ineptitude of the players at Benitez’s disposal, and less to the fact that they were employing the sensible zonal marking system.
This illustrates the problems at the heart of the Liverpool side. Roy Hodgson, like Benitez, is a manager whose style of coaching and play relies on a similarly strict adherence to tactical instruction. As gifted as some of the Liverpool players are, they are clearly not capable of playing in a way which requires such instructions. It is easy to blame a manager when things are going wrong, but if the manager has given a specific instruction that the player has not listened to, the player is clearly not adept at sticking to tactical formulations. Specific players require specific types of manager. It is why Harry Redknapp would be such a good choice as England manager; he doesn’t require his teams to stick to rigid tactical instructions, and as such the tactical ineptitude of English players in general would not be exposed in the way it currently is.
Liverpool, unlike England, are able to buy in new players, and this must be the way forward for Liverpool. It will determine the success of the Hodgson era, as his techniques require this type of player. For that reason alone, Liverpool fans should not be too despondent at the current regime at Anfield. They have the brilliant individual talents required to build a strong team, all it now takes is for Hodgson to identify the players he requires for his system to bear fruit. And as he has proven everywhere he has gone, his style of management brings success.
