Sami Hyypia

[RP]

I see lots of calls to bring him in as a defensive coach.

 

Before I ask "why?" I'll make a few of my opinions clear:

 

We need one

I love Sami

I believe in keeping legends involved in the Club - it breeds the right atmosphere and is generally the right thing to do.

 

 

Having said that ... why do we think he'd be any good? He was a very good defender for us and if we could roll the clock back several years he's exactly the kind of player we need. But why do we think he'd be the right person to come back as a coach?

 

And have we any reason to think he'd be interested? Has he made any noises that he might? I know he's left his job in management but has he said he might consider taking what would appear to be a step backwards?

[smithdown]

he was boss in the legends game

 

like, bring him on boss

[Beardsley]

I'll bring him in because as a player he was really clever. Never quick, but positioning wise he was one of the best.

Him having coached at a good level makes him an ideal candidate for me.

[£440,000]

Would Brendan want him as well?

 

Do agree we need someone and don't mind who it is as long as they're good.

 

Would be sweet if it was Sami though.

[Lee W]

With the quality of our defending we should bring him back as a player-coach.

[yellow jumper]

there's obviously stuff you can do on set pieces and situations that are universal, but we've improved out of sight in that area anyway. the idea beyond that you just get someone from the gerard houllier school to handle the defence and rodgers to do the attack is an absolute nonsense, all departments of the side feed into each other. and as it stands we're closer to a scheme that looks capable of winning leagues than anything in the preceding thirty years. i wouldn't deviate much if at all from the path we're on, other than to tweak and continue to learn from experience. no revolution required.

[Jarg Armani]

Can we just sign him as a player?

 

We've never replaced him

[johngibo YPC]

With the quality of our defending we should bring him back as a player-coach.

 

That was offered to Carragher of course, but he'd rather tell us what we're doing wrong on the TV

[RP]

That was offered to Carragher of course, but he'd rather tell us what we're doing wrong on the TV

 

 

Was it actually offered to him?

 

Do agree we need someone and don't mind who it is as long as they're good.

 

 

Yes I do - but it'd be good if it was Sami or one of our other past great defenders.

 

Like Lawro.

[RBM]

Wouldn't Steve Clarke be a better option?

[Lee W]

That was offered to Carragher of course, but he'd rather tell us what we're doing wrong on the TV

 

As if we need him to do that. To be honest he was getting on my wick last night. Sounded like a parrot.

[£440,000]

there's obviously stuff you can do on set pieces and situations that are universal, but we've improved out of sight in that area anyway. the idea beyond that you just get someone from the gerard houllier school to handle the defence and rodgers to do the attack is an absolute nonsense, all departments of the side feed into each other. and as it stands we're closer to a scheme that looks capable of winning leagues than anything in the preceding thirty years. i wouldn't deviate much if at all from the path we're on, other than to tweak and continue to learn from experience. no revolution required.

 

Don't think we need a revolution. Just some tightening up. Two goals less conceded, one last night and one against Villa, and we'd be five points clear now.

 

That's obviously hypothetical, but it is all about small margins. If we can get help to make those things go our way, then we should.

[yellow jumper]

clarke is on the same page as mourinho, which means fairly rigid, narrow, deep defensive structure, protecting centre halves with two deep lying midfielders and full backs on a leash. all of which effects what you're able to do on the ball and how you're able to do it.

[yellow jumper]

Don't think we need a revolution. Just some tightening up. Two goals less conceded, one last night and one against Villa, and we'd be five points clear now.

 

That's obviously hypothetical, but it is all about small margins. If we can get help to make those things go our way, then we should.

 

we can improve but a lot of our openness and risk taking in a defensive sense is a function of how we attack, and i wouldn't sacrifice any of that. it's got us where we are.

 

options to bring more energy into midfield or up front just as likely to have helped us yesterday. don't go along with the analysis that we just folded when attacked. we played with good balance and foundations for 60 minutes. suffered after that across the pitch. legs more than heads in my view. and an issue from top to bottom.

[honourablegeorge]

Dunno why he retired, all he ever did was automatically be in the right place and clear it.

[Lee W]

we can improve but a lot of our openness and risk taking in a defensive sense is a function of how we attack, and i wouldn't sacrifice any of that. it's got us where we are.

 

Goals 2 and 3 we conceded last night weren't a 'function' of how we attack they were just plain naive.

[£440,000]

we can improve but a lot of our openness and risk taking in a defensive sense is a function of how we attack, and i wouldn't sacrifice any of that. it's got us where we are.

 

options to bring more energy into midfield or up front just as likely to have helped us yesterday. don't go along with the analysis that we just folded when attacked. we played with good balance and foundations for 60 minutes. suffered after that across the pitch. legs more than heads in my view. and an issue from top to bottom.

 

If we don't win it, the reason will be that we haven't defended well enough and conceded too many goals.

 

We can't just go into next season without learning from that. We can't just play the same way and hope this time we score even more goals. For one, I think we'll have trouble scoring as freely next season. Teams will be better prepared for the way we play.

[yellow jumper]

Goals 2 and 3 we conceded last night weren't a 'function' of how we attack they were just plain naive.

 

perhaps, but that's a different argument to the one i'm trying to counter. and anyway the goals were a function of losing momentum and shape all over the pitch, which is how, when we've defended well, we've done it; high pressing and pressure on and off the ball from suarez back. don't buy the idea that palace weren't attempting to attack us in much the same way for the 60 minutes during which we completely dominated.

[_00_deathscar]

Hyypia wouldn't come back as a coach surely...not after having already been a manager?

[Leo No.8]

Is he not manager of Leverkusen anymore?

[Stevie H]

got sacked last month after a run of bad results. but it is hard to see him reverting to being a lower level coach when he's kicked off his managerial career at a decently-sized club.

[Rory Fitzgerald]

As if we need him to do that. To be honest he was getting on my wick last night. Sounded like a parrot.

 

I thought it was very interesting given that he played with most of that backline and under Rodgers - about as close to the horses mouth as you can get.

 

And about repetition - that's howcertain managers work. If the ball is played backwards then the backline move up two or three yards. Players can hate it but managers will want some players doing things without thinking.

 

No idea what Brendans style is in that respect obviously.

[cymrococh]

I think we need to trust Brendan to either sort it out, or reassure us that it doesn't matter as we go on to score 150 goals next season.

[Chewie]

Our style and shape will leave our defenders more exposed so if our style stays our individual defenders need to be individually better and work as a unit better. It's on them...until the shape in front of them changes. So, any coach needs to make them better defenders as players rather within our overall shape

[aka Dus]

Brendan is hardly going to admit he can't sort out the defence by bringing in a high profile 'defensive coach', or bring in someone whose status would quite possibly undermine his position if things got shaky.