11 Oct 2013

Molby insists: £16m LFC star is 'too good to warm the bench'. Problem for BR...?

After being a first team regular for most of his Liverpool career (when fit), Reds defender Daniel Agger is currently experiencing the bitter pill of bench duty, and with the club's defensive unit seemingly settled, the Dane may have to put up with being on the sidelines for some time yet. Or will he? Anfield legend Jan Molby doesn't think so, and he believes Agger will back in the starting line-up sooner rather than later.

In his column for the Liverpool Echo today, Molby argued that it 'won't be long before £16m-rated Agger forces his way back into the Liverpool side', arguing:

"Sometimes even senior players have to accept a spell on the bench. While he was out injured the team performed well and since he’s returned to fitness the manager has been reluctant to change things at the back.

"But there’s no doubt this system is made for Daniel with the way he likes to step up and play. He would improve most Premier League teams and he’s too good to be warming the bench over an extended period".


Given Agger's status as vice-captain, a swift return to the team may seem likely, but in my view, it's not that cut and dried.

* Toure, Skrtel and Sakho are performing well, none of those three currently deserves to be dropped.

* The Reds have won the last two Premier League games; Would it be fair to change a winning team just to accommodate Agger?

* If Agger does come back into the team, it would surely be at the expense of Mamadou Sakho, who is also a left-footed central defender. Agger and Sakho could probably play together, but it would (arguably) unbalance the back-three.

I doubt Sakho would be impressed at being dropped this early into his LFC career. He left PSG as a result of being messed about by the manager, and with the World Cup approaching, he needs to be play.

* LFC only have league games until January, so if anyone is dropped, it'll mean two weeks (or more) without starting, and on current form, Toure, Sakho and Skrtel don't deserve that length of time on the sidelines.

* Agger, on the other hand, has already made a couple of costly mistakes this season, and his injury proneness seems to be returning. As such, he is the obvious choice to stay on the sidelines right now, irrespective of his status as vice-captain.

Liverpool's current central defensive situation is unsustainable. With the reduced number of games, the club clearly cannot keep four senior central defenders happy, and this could end up being a problem as the season progresses.

It could be argued that poor-planning is to blame here. Why did Rodgers bring in THREE central defenders over the summer? If he planned on keeping Skrtel and Agger, surely two would've sufficed? Additionally, why buy another left-sided central defender? Surely, it's obvious that this would cause selection issues, especially in a 433 formation.

The situation is somewhat assuaged at the moment by the use of 352, but rather than being a long-gestating plan on Rodgers' part, this smacks of opportunistically altering the system to accommodate players.

If Liverpool stick to 352 for the whole season, then Rodgers may get away with having so many central defenders, but I can't see that happening. The team will revert 433 (or variations thereof) at some stage, and when that happens, the battle to accommodate four senior central defenders will become even more acute.

Sooner or later, something has to give, and it's possible that one of either Agger or Skrtel may leave during the the January transfer window. In my view, it should be Agger. I'm a huge fan of the Danish defender, but accommodating two starting left-sided central defenders just isn't going to work.

Name one top class team in Europe that regularly players two left-footed central defenders.



NOTE: Please stick to the Comment Policy (Click to read)


51 comments:

  1. NO PLAYER IS TO GOOD TO WARM THE BENCH

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't understand why two left footed centre backs would unsettle a back three but two right footed center backs won't?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Does it matter? or should I say "So what" get a life and get a proper job will you...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yeah im not sure about that either.

    ReplyDelete
  5. According to Jamie Carragher:

    "In my experience, you can play two right-footed central defenders as a partnership — that was the case when Sami Hyypia and I played alongside each other — but I have never seen a team line up with two left-footed central defenders as a partnership"

    Carra is a defender, and if he thinks it can't be done, I'm in no position to disagree.

    ReplyDelete
  6. A team with 2 left sided defenders?? There is an obvious one :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. I imagine there are a few reasons:

    * Two left-footers = easier for right footed attackers. If they cut to the right, it will always be on the weaker side of the defender.

    * Makes the defence weaker on the most important side: the right. You need a defender who can defend robustly with his right foot, especially when attacks are coming on that side. Would you trust Agger to do the job with his weaker foot? I wouldn't.

    There are probably other reasons, and I'm sure someone will list them.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Cares isn't saying it can't be done, he's saying he's never seen it done. And since when did competition for places and strength in depth become a "problem". Seems to have brought the best out of skrtel again... Pointless article.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Seriously... L R R or L L R what's the difference? Absolutely nonsense IMO

    ReplyDelete
  10. BR probably thought that Touré would be useful cover and a good senior influence in the dressing room, but didn't anticipate just how well he'd perform. Skrtel had question marks all over him (no, not some new tats), so Agger and Sakho were probably favourites for the top two CB slots, despite both being left footed.
    Don't see why any of them should leave, but if price is really right, then I guess we could afford to lose either Skrtel or Agger, though I'd prefer them to stay.
    Nice problem for BR to have.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I firmly believe we are going back tot he time of:- 1, your injured you get fit and fight your way back into the team. 2, your playing badly, your dropped until proven you can be trusted again (Skrtel), BR IMO knows what he is doing and i for one back him 110%....DA if he wants back into the team needs to prove he is better then the players currently playing, simple!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Granted, but there must be a reason for that, no?

    ReplyDelete
  13. This article makes some good points:

    http://touchlinebanfootball.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/two-left-footed-centre-backs.html

    A left footed pairing is worse because the rest of the team may be predominantly right footed. As well as the obvious problem of constant passing and controlling the ball with your "wrong" foot, it could change all of the passing angles out from the back, and in.

    Another problem is if you have a high defensive line, lefty central defenders are more exposed to one-on-one defending if they are constantly on their "wrong" side. Of course one of the centre backs should be fine but it takes a top class lefty cb to cover the regular 'righty' slot and deal with the threat. In theory what I've just said should apply to two righties playing together but it's a more common occurrence plus the fact that a good righty can clear with his left and at least play simple with his left (John Terry a good example who plies his trade mainly on the left of a pairing, as does Nemanja Vidic). Lefties tend to have weaker rights.

    t would affect build up play if the pairing is rotated from two lefties to righty or righties as gk distribution would change and also how the full backs are utilized.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Skrtel has been the ball playing defender since Rodgers switched to 3 at the back so I am leaning towards Agger replacing Skrtel should the Dane come straight back into the team.


    The defence would be unbalanced if Rodgers plays four at the back with Agger and Sakho as a centre back pair.

    With 3 at the back there were will be no unbalance with Toure on the right, Agger in the middle and Sakho down the left. Sakho has proven this early on that he should be in the team. I would be very surprised if he is dropped.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The way they are performing at the moment, Toure, Skrtel and Sakho, are undroppable,
    especially Skrtel, who I had written off last season, he is playing brilliantly, even the OG he scored for Slovakia tonight was worth looking at.

    ReplyDelete
  16. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y6lJMkpuio

    ReplyDelete
  17. Wouldn't contend on this point. Think the key issue is our both left-footers in Sako and Agger are too slow so they can't play together. Play against passing teams like Swansea and speedy teams like Spurs and we will be in trouble.

    ReplyDelete
  18. We have 6 central defenders. 4 are competing for a place, 1 is injured and won't be back and the other is a youngster.


    Loan Illori out and the problem is solved. Why, in January, would you sell any of our senior centre backs if we are in a good position in the league and we can challenge for the top 4? Huge risk of that backfiring on us.


    4 players competing for 2 places is healthy. United have 5 centre backs, look at how City struggle without Kompany.


    Yesterday I read on here that we should sell Skrtel, and now Agger. Illori was brought in to replace Coates who will be gone once he is back from injury and no matter how good Toure is right now he is not a long term option. Restructure the squad in the summer, not January.

    ReplyDelete
  19. In a formation using 3 at the back, the central player is never going to be on his stronger side is he? He's in the centre!!
    I'd give up on this one if I were you mate…

    Jamie

    ReplyDelete
  20. Right sided attackers go straight on to the left foot of the defender!! Does anyone remember Arbeloa's debut? He played at left back v Baecelona to counteract Messi cutting in from the right wing onto his left foot. Man of the match too I do recall

    ReplyDelete
  21. Kelly and Wisdom are also CB's. We have more than enough cover should the club accept a good offer for Skrtel in January.

    ReplyDelete
  22. You are missing the point. Kelly is better at right back and Wisdom's performances have highlighted his inexperience. Why would you sell your better players if you're in a good position in the league? Why shoot ourselves in the foot?

    ReplyDelete
  23. I am not missing your point. I am saying that if the club had to sell Skrtel in January then we would have enough cover at the back. Wisdom has only played a RB in our competitive matches. clearly he is out of his depth in this position. At CB Wisdom is much more comfortable.

    ReplyDelete
  24. There are not so many left footed centre defenders at all. And 2 in same team is more uncommon...

    ReplyDelete
  25. This has been one of the most interesting threads to read in a long time with some excellent contributions. Thanks guys :)

    For my 2p worth, I think we do have a surplus and that in BR's mind in the summer, he bought defenders to strengthen us and to allow Skrtel to move on. He is playing very well right now for sure but I wouldn't rate him as undroppable for Agger to replace.

    Despite all the arguments about left and right footedness, there are other things to consider. Agger is more level-headed than Skrtel and less prone to rash decisions. As good as Skrtel has been recently, he has had spells like this before but they have been temporary and I feel this one will be the same. Sakho is a more than worthy replacement so I'd sell Skrtel for around the £13m mark and put the money towards a central midfielder.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Of course Agger is too good to warm the bench, but has that not been one of our biggest problems over the last few years. Squad members who were simply not good enough to play 1st team football. When injuries happened, or games needed to be changed from the bench, there was nothing there.
    It may be un realistic of me to think this many central defenders can be kept happy past january. But we need players on the bench and in the squad who are at 1st team level. I would like to see us keep the Dane to the end of the season, and if we qualify for CL there will be plenty of games to go round next year.
    I think too that Toure will have to be given a rest at some stage (i have been very surprised at his conditioning so far he's in top shape) as the game tike will catch up on him. Also there will be injuries, so Agger will get his chance (assuming its not him again on the table), until then he just has to bide his time. It's not a whole lot to ask of a player who has been stuck by through many an injury term either.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Wisdom is not going to make I'm afraid to say.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Wisdom has all the qualities to become a top CB. He is also only 20. Still has many years to develop. He just needs a loan move to gain regular first team action.

    ReplyDelete
  29. haha what about Bayern Munich?? Eh?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Bayern Munich?? Best team in world football!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  31. Bayern Munich use 2 left footed CB!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  32. Jamie why don't you ask Brendan tigers to move over and you manage the team. Who do you think you are to question BR. I've never seen anything you write here that you are happy with. You always slagging off something about lfc

    ReplyDelete
  33. Don't forget Lucas plays as deep as the centre-backs (something match-goers are well aware of) which would balance out two left-footers with two right footers. Personally, I don't think it's an issue - after all, no-one has mentioned which way are they facing at the point it matters :)

    I reckon Skrtel is gone in January and Agger in the Summer. Our centre-back pairing will be Sahko and Toure with Ilori, Kelly and Wisdom in reserve.

    No-one is too good to warm the bench except Sturridge.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Kelly is pencilled in as a centre-back by everyone including himself.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Who is to say we won't sell both and buy another in?

    Skrtel and Agger are hardly a reliable pairing or reliable individually. Neither are fit to lick Hyypia's boots. Toure and Sahko are talented footballers, they'll adapt to any change.

    Rodgers wants as many attackers on the pitch as possible, he wants more goals and no position is exempt from that except the keeper...

    John Terry scores a goal approximately every 10 games, David Luiz the same, Vertonghen 1 in 10, Vermaelen 1 in 9, Vidic 1 in 13 we have Skrtel 1 in 22, Agger 1 in 22.

    I expect we will get £25m+ for the pair and it represents good business as they'll both be on a high wage and they're a couple of seasons away from having no sell-on value. I bet Rodgers is on the hunt for a top quality CB, who scores 1 in 10, as we speak.

    ReplyDelete
  36. You see right footed defenders play the left sided CB position but very rarely would you see a leftie play the right sided position; there are far more right footed players and if a team doesn't have a left footed CB they develop a righty to play there. Most right footed CBs will have had to play on the left at some point during their career. Left footed CBs are rare and therefore are always played in that position, from youth teams and up. They are developed specifically for that role and are probably rarely exposes to the right sided role. That's also why so many lefties are entirely one footed. It's a rare commodity and coaches focus on it too much while righties are encouraged to use both feet.

    In a 3 I think it's no problem, and I think in the long run either of agger or sakho could be coached to play on the right. In the mean time, I'd play agger instead of Enrique.

    ReplyDelete
  37. it doesnt its a myth good footballer can play any where

    ReplyDelete
  38. carra was a very average defender with very average skills its just he was a local lad,,,top class central defenders can play with anyone...when you cant trap a ball for toffee you need every advantage

    ReplyDelete
  39. Honestly, if we decide to continue playing 3 centre backs, I cannot see a problem with one of the 4 'warming the bench'. As regards strength in depth, surely this is a good thing, no? At this moment in time, out of the four central defenders we have, Agger deserves to be on the bench, due to his mistakes, waiting for his chance to come on and make sure he retains his place. Come lads, if we didnt have an Agger on the bench then you would all be complaining that we dont have enough central defenders. Its better to have too much than not enough IMHO.

    ReplyDelete
  40. At the moment, I would say Suarez is too good to warm the bench, no? Sturridge? Coutinho? I am sorry, maybe I misunderstood but, for me, these are players too good to warm the bench for Liverpool at this stage. Correct me if I am wrong!!!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Sorry Jaime, where did he say it can't be done?

    ReplyDelete
  42. Does this fall into the category of left-footed penalty takers??? Haha.

    ReplyDelete
  43. So he wants a centre back that can score goals because he wasted money on Alberto/Borini/Aspas who can't find the net? I think that's a little ridiculous. Terry is a threat in the box but Luiz is a defensive liability who constantly puts his team under pressure. The priority of a centre back is to defend and Skrtel is back to his best form.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Who says he wasted money on Alberto and Aspas? They've only been here 5 minutes, ffs. You've just manufactured that from scratch, which is definitely ridiculous.

    Be honest, you have no idea what is going to happen in January or the Summer nor do you know who'll be injured etc The two centre-backs you pray to god we'll keep are the most unreliable pairing in living memory, admit it.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Look at your argument though? Ship Skrtel+Agger out for a centre back who scores more goals? The wasted money on Borini/Aspas/Alberto should slap you right in the face. Look at the next article on this site and all the comments from JK: That will prove to you that Rodgers has wasted around 40m. Why look for centre backs who score goals, shouldn't Rodgers focus on attackers who can score goals?


    We can sign new players who are considered upgrades and if that's the case I don't have a problem with Agger being sold. If a good offer comes in for Skrtel I expect him to be sold too. However the underlying principle is that Skrtel is in fantastic form and at present should not be sold. If a better *defender* is available, fine but not for a centre back who apparently scores more goals.


    Gerrard hasn't scored a goal in open play in about 20 matches but you want centre backs to start scoring...

    ReplyDelete
  46. Saying Rodgers has wasted £40m is just plain silly, are you saying _if_ they fail we won't get any sell on fee? Really... that's just ridiculous.

    What I'm saying is that Rodgers wants more goals, more attackers on the pitch.

    Skrtel can't be sold while he is in form as the window is closed! We don't know how long this form will last. Both he and Agger will not have any sell-on value in a couple of seasons and that is how FSG work, plain and simple. Neither can hold a candle to Hyypia. We can do better, it's a fact.

    If the younger players (bought and from the academy) don't make the grade they'll be sold, not given away! Please justify why £40m has been wasted - provide evidence why the £40m worth of players will be moved on completely free of charge.

    Shankly had regrets about squad development and went 7 years without a trophy as a result. You can expect a high turnover of players now - no need for jerking your knees everywhere - welcome to the future.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Did I say free of charge? No. Read the next article on the site and you will see why (arguably) the 40m spent is a waste. I'd think we'd be lucky to recoup half of that outlay.


    I didn't argue against Skrtel or anyone else being sold to accommodate better players. I argued against Skrtel being sold for a centre back who scores more goals. I understand what Rodgers wants, more goals, but they should come from his apparent transfer failures and not the likes of Skrtel

    ReplyDelete
  48. Yes, completely free of charge! If we recouped half that (who's to say we won't get all our money back?) based on your calculation it's £20m wasted. Can you see how that works?

    We will be able to improve on Skrtel with a player who is better defending and scores 1 in 10 and save money too. Fair play to him for hanging on this long, he strikes me as a Newcastle player, good/great sometimes, indifferent most of the time.

    ReplyDelete
  49. For me that article is nonsense, the first paragraph states as well as the obvious problem of passing and controlling the ball with your wrong foot lol, anyone who has played football realises you pass the ball to your team mates stronger foot, its not a difficult concept, if the keeper is left footed you play the ball back to his left foot, to make it out like lefties are inferior to us righties.


    The guy who wrote it even points out his own nonsense, In theory what ive just said should apply to 2 righties but its a more common occurance, yes thats because there are more righties than lefties in the world. If it was the other way round that lefties were more common than righties then from this logic you would be writing the same article about 2 right sided players playing together wont work

    ReplyDelete