When watching games of football, many questions might enter your head: “How is this implemented”, “To what extent are the actions spontaneous, guided or automatised?” “does that framework replicate the thinking of a top-level analyst or coach?”, “How does one develop the grace, elegance and aura of Virgil van Djik?” and “how would I prepare against *insert opposition*?”.
It is the latter question that this piece seeks to grant more clarity on, hopefully turning baseless speculation into somewhat clear and tangible speculation. Cameron and I imagined being employed at a Premier League club, and performing the task of opposition analysis and preparing corresponding training resulting from that.
Firstly, we had to settle on a team. The selection of Liverpool was easy once a potential shortlist had be drawn up because it allowed us: novelty, in that neither of us had watched Liverpool in particular depth in the previous seasons; a high quality team with a distinct playstyle, that undergoes minor but noticeable alterations, particularly related to personnel; and, one which is largely principle-based. This in particular was useful as it lead to more abstract concepts appearing, which are simultaneously are particularised to Liverpool in how they are enacted, meaning, we could work around the unique dangers offered by world-class players such as Salah and Trent Alexander Arnold, whilst nevertheless hopefully making a more broadly applicable coaching/analysis piece.
For example, diagonal balls are dangerous because they allow for territorial progression against a horizontally compact block – Liverpool are the masters at this with van Djik and Thiago frequently spraying passes with speed and precision. Salah poses a direct threat 1v1 against the opposition, forcing opposition delay through allowing gained territory and doubling up/compaction. Henderson reliably underlaps whilst Trent sitting deeper in the half-space can exploit the vertical gains and doubling up on Salah as winning territory places him in a higher zone to execute crosses. Hence, they represent an amplified version of a common threat. The same widespread applicability with Liverpool at the pinnacle can broadly be seen in the other two categories we explored.
Methodologically, we decided to watch 5 consecutive Liverpool games (the same for both) to grant a sample size realistic to the packed work schedule of a Premier League team in addition to providing variety in opposition which highlighted distinct aspects of Liverpool’s game. We watched: Milan (H), Crystal Palace (H), Brentford (A), Porto (A) Man. City (H)
Subsequently, we analysed them separately, and then collaborated on what aspects we thought were pertinent. The areas we identified as most pertinent to combat and/or adapt around were:
Liverpool’s diagonals and wide rotations
Liverpool’s press (both settled and counter)
And Liverpool’s aggressive rest defence.
From this, we created three corresponding drills which could be used in preparation by a team to face Liverpool. With full trust in the process achieved by the coaching staff, we embark upon our march to victory.
Cameron and I decided upon reading each others work that we liked the distinct style each of us presented, and wouldn’t want to combine each others work to make something not quite as good as either. Therefore, whilst the material presented is the same, and we collaborated and came to a consensus regarding focus - how we explain the drills differs.
So, I would highly implore you to read Cameron’s account to get a different perspective, and potentially a perspective that better resonates with you.
6v6+2:
This game seeks to prepare the defence to react to Liverpool’s wide rotations, which typically feature the midfielder underlapping, the winger receiving in space and the full back behind ready to receive upon the initial attack in a period of pressure and subsequently morphs into high full backs, covered by the midfielders with the winger in the interiour after pressure has been sustained. This is an observational trend which is assumed to be incentivised to maximise the players respective skillsets rather than anything concrete. Within given moments, depending on the game situation presented which is fluid, the players fulfil the responsibility demanded by the rotation dictated by wherever they may be positioned.
The neutrals are designed to mimic the wide outlets who get time in possession to play crosses, where the attacking team seek to score into the rotated mini goals – thus incentivising back post crossing. Moreover, underlaps are encouraged, and the positioning of the goals make them instantly dangerous and thus requiring covering and blocking of space (which would represent a half-space cross). It therefore encourages a degree of man-orientation in tracking to limit the scope of the attacker’s movement by pushing them backwards after receiving which will be discussed later, in addition to the key role played by the midfielders in blocking space.
This can be considered a sustained pressure defending drill, and an attempt to break it via incorporating a transitional element through the wingbacks which seeks to then play through Liverpool’s narrow counterpress. Crucially, it acts as a simplified step to the more advanced sustained pressure drill touched on later which seeks to integrate an additional degree of complexity - allowing a fluid progression pathway without overloading initially.
4-2-4 drill: 7v6+2
This game seeks to model Liverpool’s encroaching press which entails slow progression prior to pressing activation, using aspects such as wall passes to trigger compaction prior to press activation. This is combined with the greater element of engaging intensity seen against teams such as Manchester City which seeks to push teams wide to generate turnovers through limiting time and space for the ball carrier, including the goalkeeper.
The additional players in the side Rondo are designed to switch frequently with four players to ensure a high level of intensity is maintained throughout the drill to simulate high pressing scenarios from deep build-up.
Incorporating automatisms is up to the coaches discretion – guided discovery additionally which seeks to unveil the principles underlying the automatisms to create a more flexible skillset as concepts become ingrained rather than a rigid plan is moreover possible, and potentially more advisable in a developmental context.
Tactical skills such as the centre back adding depth to support the wide ball carrier by creating more space vertically stretching, underlapping runs from midfielders deep or to create time for the ball carrier or a direct threat are the ‘underlying automatism principles’ if you will. How to use compactness and dynamic superiority when facing man-orientation – or how to deal with gradual encroachment which permits free men deeper to prioritise compact zonal coverage and the creation of pressing traps through numerical superiorities in tight pockets.
The one thing lacking in this drill is attaining the dynamic superiority as it focuses on beating the first line of pressure, and therefore the dropping forward commonly seen in 4-2-4 build-up to exploit channels or central space depending on opposition set-up is not a feature rather they are replaced with two neutrals who act as up-back through movements which seeks to ingrain another pattern and improve third man movements. Providing the in-game benefit of being capable of beating pressure while allowing the game to be predicated to a greater extent on beating pressure rather than the attacking transition – as their placement provides direct access to the goals of wide and central progression represented by the goals, allowing the format to be competitive and maintain intensity through having a shorter pitch compared to a full pitch create and attack the transition game. Here we are focused on the create the transition and beat the press aspect.
Wide goals are worth fewer to represent the decreased danger directly progressing down one flank represents, despite its often-easier direct achievability in build-up if forced because the opponent can more easily constrain via the touchline, thus central breakthroughs which create sufficient time to muster a shoot (vaguely comparable to a through pass – to the extent more time + space is beneficial and allows for greater accuracy).
The game attempts to incorporate the dangers of horizontally and vertically stretching by encouraging transition from the defensive team by allowing them to score after winning possession – which grants them 3 points respectively – ball going out of play represents 1 (run this by Cam) which emphasises clean turnovers while still rewarding safer defending.
7v4 + 4 defending and transition game:
Diagonals are a pronounced feature of Liverpool’s game which are more potent when facing a back four because of the reduced horizontal coverage on the last line comparatively. Greater coverage is provided by a back 5 facilitates better initial positioning to respond, leading to diagonals being more contested, and if received, under pressure with greater speed to prevent progression in addition to better ball-sided support deep due to the wider centre backs positioning.
This nullification is not without cost as midfield coverage is reduced correspondingly, which means the midfield line can often be stretched when required to shuttle to a ball-side, by bypassed via the spare men afforded at the back creating 2v1 or 3v2 situations where the far-sided half-space was left unoccupied. Therefore the previously mentioned elements of wide overloads and rotations remain pertinent. Similar rationale can moreover be ascribed to the transitional element and use of neutrals which rewards turnovers with a potential counter-attacking opportunity against Liverpool’s narrow rest defence.
The drill is seeking to implement a 5-3 defending game oriented around gaining coordination amongst the back 5 required to become more man-oriented to react to switches and dropping of players during Liverpool’s interchanges – limiting time in possession and adapting around reduced spatial coverage caused by aggressive stepping out, creating the covering mechanisms.
Perhaps counterintuitively, we decided the best way to replicate back 5 defending conditions was to use a line of four, as it is an attempt to replicate ball-sided coordination, thus the far-sided player is often superfluous, and acts to make the shuttling and spatial coverage aspect too easy. It therefore makes the ball-sided defender step out like a wing-back, and the rest to cover like centre backs in thier respective roles (ball-sided, central and far-sided).
The midfielders play a crucial role maintaining compactness, covering aggressive defending, cutting passing lanes and shuttling. Thier role is more positional contrasted to the defenders, engaged more actively in duels but they are permitted to step up on the deep neutrals to further block passing lanes and piston play should they desire.
On the ball-side, centre backs being aggressive following forwards is pertinent in mid-block phases to prevent Mane and Salah becoming active in the game, as it forces regressive and circulatory actions from them. The spatial covering mechanisms are moreover often man-oriented in design, as tracking should be encouraged to defend any potential runs in behind. If the wide player attempts an infiltratory run upon the trigger on the wide CB stepping out onto the interior player, the wing-back initially responsible should look to compact with his supporting CB assuming the ball is centrally oriented. Generating constraining mechanisms is important when pressing these types of balls, thus in-to-out pressing should be prioritised, as in this hypothetical, should the ball end up moving towards the flank, the central CB’s positioning is often more conducive to prevent direct actions from the flank and forcing play backwards waiting for the WB’s support contrasted to the WB pressing which shows the defender inwards. The aim is to show play out wide, and thus commit directionally to the ball-side.
Thus, man-orientation as it is traditionally conceptualised as more rigid man-marking is not sufficient – the man is a reference point for defensive actions, but is more sophisticated than follow, as showing play to non-dangerous areas and limiting progressive space is paramount. Directionally, balls in behind should be shown towards the flank, balls into the feet of attackers can be followed in a more rigid man-marking sense from the wide centre backs who are encouraged to be aggressive while the midfielder fluidly tucks in. Milan Škriniar is a good archetype for defenders to work from, low body positioning, hunched while feet are rarely parallel to increase reactivity to the opposition.
With reference to how they may function considering Liverpool’s deep wide rotations for instance consider the ball has been circulated to Trent on the right, à la Brentford:
A 3v2 is momentarily achieved – the instruction in these instances are that of zonal responsibility within the man-oriented format. Abstractly, the wing back is responsible for the flank, the centre back the half-space and wide midfielder the deep half-space. A more concrete instruction is that of ‘passing on’ players once they leave/enter zones. Tight marking is encouraged from the centre back, but not the wing back, who rather responds intensely to the trigger of the pass to the winger whilst the near-side midfielder is oriented around preventing the deep-half space player from having sufficient time and space to perform a dangerous action (i.e., the type of deep, selected cross Trent is known for) so his responsibility is block space ahead of the player while gradually encroaching, being more cautious in intensities to prevent himself being beaten directly, and adaptable to change in directions/ attempted dribbles – to then follow any near-sided action.
If an underlap ensues after the ball to the wider player the zonal-man passing on approach faces issues, as in this circumstance, the centre back should stay rigid to their man, under the aforementioned notion of constraining play by forcing reception to be facing the touchline, while the tightness prevents the possession player from pivoting. The near-sided midfielder should they tuck in to block space. In an extreme hypothetical, where the underlapping player receives an underlap to support, directionally, the centre, centre back should follow and commit to the ball side while the midfielders tuck in and cover.
I do not think the passing on approach is undermined by overloading particular regions, because it creates too much compactness around the ball to play around i.e., the half-space player moving wide without counter movement to overload the flank and receive would be similarly stepped up on after leaving the zone and receiving the pass from a deep half-space player whilst the exploitable space in behind the CB dragged is covered simultaneously by the close proximity of the near-sided half-space player to the ball carrier and the covering mechanism of in-to-out CB man-orientation when the ball is played into space.
The key thing this drill works on is coordination with teammates with regards to responding to opposition triggers – working under the base ‘passing on approach’ in a 5-3-2 and learning how and when to change under directional triggers (in-to-out). It emphasises aggressive 1v1 defending in initial duels to block off progressive space, while encouraging compaction from the near-sided midfielders who are less oriented around a man than the defenders and are rather ball-oriented.
The issue when describing defensive adaptation is grayscale nature of many of the terms used. In the words of Arrigo Sacchi, sourced through Adin Osmanbašić’s incredible Juego de Posición under Pep Guardiola
“Our players had four reference points: the ball, the space, the opponent, and their own teammates. Every movement had to happen in relation to these reference points. Each player had to decide which of these reference points should determine his movements.”
Therefore, reducing the defenders focus by creating a definitive term around these does not fully capture the ambiguity of the situation but rather focuses on their main focus. It is complexity issues like this which I feel drills such as the one designed will help deal with, because it allows responses to problems as they arise rather than relying on abstract principles. The possession team can attack, enact their wide rotations and the coach can stop play, explain potential issues microcosmically, go again, if they overcommit to the next principle, adapt and so forth and in this regard decision making is improved to the extent the inflexibility of the principle initially used to briefly explain is rendered defunct. It tries to build a mental catalogue of events, reactions and responses while making it explicit where issues potentially arose.
To maintain intensity, every three minutes the players with black bibs will switch with the red team so that the defending gray team is always facing fresh attackers. The number selected will vary depending the fitness level of the given team - the important aspect is that the drill simulates, to the closest possible approximation, game-like conditions.
Concluding thoughts:
This was a fun project to work on, particularly as someone with no coaching background, paired with Cameron who has far greater expertise in how to plan and organise sessions. The collaboration element forced us both elaborate and dig deeper to ensure clarity was present as there was a mutual desire and respect to gain understanding from the other. As reading his piece will show, we have contrasting styles which I felt complemented us well on this project, producing something neither (at least I) wouldn’t have been able to do independently.
That I am aware of, this is the first project of this type, so we welcome any feedback into this previously uncharted territory, as omissions were inevitable. Thank you for reading, and I again, implore you to read Cam’s piece to have a more rounded perspective.
Cam’s piece: My better half
Cam’s Twitter handle: @CamH___