Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Houllier = Jack Charlton

  • 27-12-2002 8:57pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25


    Put them under pressure, hoof it long, yeah yeah, tossers. Except Charltons teams hoofed it long to Quinn/Cascarino, not Micheal Owen. Charlton wasted a very good Irish squad, Liverpool is wasted on that clown. He is tunnel visioned and has taken us as far as he can. Good foundations, good defensively, good organisation, but that doesnt make a good manager, certainly not one good enough for liverpool. Even Lawrenson/Hansen/Lineker are echoing my sentiments for **** sake.


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,432 ✭✭✭Steve_o


    You shouldn't compare Jack Charlton with liverpools muppit manager. And those tactics only when you've got tall players and the last time i looked Michael Owen isn't exactly breakin records for his height!!!!!!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,092 ✭✭✭Pigman


    Jack Charlton = terrible football + overachievement

    Gerard Houllier = terrible football + underachievement

    Plus Charltons main ethic was to blast balls from the back four as close as possible to the CORNERflags in order for our strikers to easily turn the opposition and hold up the ball whilst our midfield came in to support.

    The portion of Liverpools tactics that might be discribed as 'long ball' are based mainly on getting it over the top into the on-running striker in a CENTRAL position and giving him little support in that scenario.

    Two totally different gameplans.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25 Chuckwalla


    Yeah what you say is true Pigman, but the point I was trying to make is that both are underutilising the resources available to them terribly. I didnt emphasise that enough, sorry. Ireland had genuine quality players who could have played a much more advanced type of football, and possibly achieved more. We had players successfully playing a passing game in the league every week, but Charlton wasted a generation of talent. More could have been achieved.

    Houllier similarly doesnt utilise the resources available to him. There are ridiculous restrictions on everything we do that stop the team showing its full potential. Even when he picks what I consider the correct team, its potential is stifled....eg. I remember some game last season where he played Riise,Hamann,Gerrard,Litmanen in midfield and Owen,Heskey up front. Now with the arguable exception of Heskey, that is class. An excellent anchor man, a brilliant box to box player who scores/creates/passes/tackles brilliantly, one of the most technically gifted, creative players ever, and a brilliantly direct, fast, goal scoring "winger". Up front, Owen - nuff said. That is potentially brilliant, and with most managers would be. However, Le Genius sees fit to clamp them all rigidly. Potential wasted, a la Charlton.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 857 ✭✭✭kamobe


    Charlton did well with what he had.....
    Long ball worked for us (I reckon). Hell, even in the last world cup, took big Quinny to stroll on and nod the ball down to Robbie in the dying seconds against Germany to get us through the next round!

    That aside, hoofing the ball to Owen is the stupidest thing I've ever seen in my entire life. Ever. EVER. I personally like a 4-3-3...
    That's 4 defence...
    Two anchors in front of them...
    One creative midfielder (we miss you Jari:() behind the front line..
    The 'Strikers' right and left would provide width on each side, coming in to partner the main striker when the ball is switched, and the main striker being a 'proper' goal scorer. I would play Owen was one of these wide strikers, and Fowler (*growl*) in the middle.

    Ambitious maybe, but I've always preferred attacking football :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,081 ✭✭✭BKtje


    Liverpool badly lack width. They need someone to go wide and give in crosses.
    All the defence they play again can play very central, you then get say neville, silvestre,brown and oshea practically standing along the edge of their own box.
    This gives owen very little room to use his pace as he'll be closed down in seconds.

    You need people to go wide!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25 Chuckwalla


    Ya I like the sound of Kamobe's team. Personally, I'd play a diamond in midfield, with the full backs providing the width. Riise is definitely capable of that, Babbel too, Carragher to a certain extent. Hamann sits in front of the centre backs (picks up eg. Yakin for **** sake). Gerrard + Diao/Cheryou in front of him, and Cheryou/Diouf behind Owen and Baros. Plenty of steel, creativity, goal threat all over the place, Baros and Owen's games seem to complement each others well. But that aint ever gonna happen because of the negativity of that clown, rant rant rant rant rant


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,832 ✭✭✭Waylander


    I agree that the Pool need to adjust their tactics but they also need a couple of players who can carry the ball in midfield and run at opposition teams. United have them in Giggs and Scholes, Arsenal have Ljungberg and Pires. Liverpool have noone, and if they did Houllier would not play them, ie Patrick Berger and Litmanen. If I was a liverpool fan I would have been calling for his head long ago even taking their treble into account.


Advertisement