O Captain! Roy’s Captain! - What happened to Wayne?

28 years old. Captain of both his country and one of the biggest football clubs on the planet. £300,000 a week wages. Commercial deals coming out of his ears. The prospect of becoming both England and Manchester United’s all time record goal scorer looms ever closer on the horizon.

‘So, where did it all go wrong, Wayne?’

If, like me, you grew up in the north west of England and took an interest in football then the chances are that you had heard of Wayne Rooney before he made his explosive Premier League entrance with that goal against Arsenal. Murmurs about a special talent dwelling in Everton’s youth teams were around long before David Seamen was left helplessly clutching thin air in front of a jubilant Goodison Park in 2002. Back then it was easy for a sceptical non Evertonian like myself to scoff at the notion that the Blues had some secret weapon ready to unleash upon the Premier League. I’d heard it all before and the reality never stacked up to the stories: Michael Branch, Franny Jeffers, Danny Cadamarteri, need I go on? Well, in this case, yes actually, I must. Because Wayne Rooney was no myth.

Within a few months of that famous goal against the then reigning champions, Rooney was lighting up English football on a weekly basis. Terrorizing defenders with a mixture of rare natural ability and breathtaking power, he blazed a trail through the Premier League and was, soon enough, making Euro 2004 his own personal coming out party before injury struck.

A £30m move to Manchester United quickly came along and with it a Champions League debut hat trick that confirmed what we already knew: Rooney was more than ready for the big time. During his first two seasons at Old Trafford he was undoubtedly United’s star turn. A period of transition was taking place at the club and the young Scouser was set to be the man who would lead United into a new era of success.

That success duly arrived in the form of multiple league titles and three European Cup finals. But this is where things become complicated in the Wayne Rooney story.

By 2007, Rooney’s downward trajectory was already in motion even if the public couldn't yet see it. Despite being England’s main man by this time, he had already become a supporting act at club level. He remained an audaciously gifted player capable of the extraordinary, but a supporting act none the less. It was Cristiano Ronaldo who had took on the mantle of becoming United’s next talisman. The Portuguese, who Rooney was often compared favourably to during their early days together in Manchester, had moved onto a new level and England’s latest great hope was now required to do a lot of the leg work while Ronaldo took centre stage.

People complained at the time - and indeed since - that Alex’s Ferguson’s decision to often use Rooney out wide and make the most of his work rate to free Ronaldo was what stunted the progress of England’s most talented footballer in a generation. They may be right. But so was Ferguson to do what he did. Vindication of his decision to ‘sacrifice’ Rooney in order to get the best out of Ronaldo was immediately apparent and hasn't diminished with the passing of time. Seven years on, it now seems almost unfathomable to think that debates ever existed about which player was more gifted or who United should have built around. In 2014, Wayne Rooney remains a very good Premier League footballer. Cristiano Ronaldo now belongs to a different stratosphere altogether and has done for years. The gap between the two continues to accelerate at a high speed.

Following Ronaldo’s protracted defection to Madrid during the summer of 2009, a new incarnation of Rooney emerged and flourished. He took his place as the spearhead of United’s attack and scored 26 league goals playing as a striker in just 32 appearances. One must acknowledge that his numbers have always been impressive. Goals and assists have never been in short supply during his career but, as early as that successful 2009/10 season, it was apparent that the Rooney we were witnessing was a different beast to the teenager who had defenders in a perpetual state of panic. Statistics were, and remain, enduring evidence of his undoubted quality, but the fantasy footballer who got people off their seats and had England fans dreaming of a bright future was no more. At this point he was ‘just’ an excellent striker, not the ‘White Pele’ United fans expectantly sang about upon his arrival.

There are many theories as to why this came to pass. A lack of professionalism off the pitch has regularly been cited. Rooney’s fluctuating weight, for example, has often been a source of ridicule for his detractors and frustration for his supporters. Injuries have been quite a regular occurrence also, and there is little doubt that they have taken a toll on a player has never resembled the finely tuned athlete he probably should have been. Whatever it was along the way that took the spark from Rooney’s game, it left him devoid of the one thing that made him truly special. The ability to beat a man with raw power or pace has been absent for a long time now. If you can’t beat players the chances are you won’t be perceived as an elite forward in modern day football. People gawp at the likes of Messi, Ibrahimovic, Suarez and Ronaldo because they effortlessly leave defenders trailing either by way of excessive skill, pace or power. Their status isn't what it is because they simply put up decent numbers. Like the defenders they torment every week, those elite players have left Rooney in their rear view mirrors.

So what of the present and the future? Wayne Rooney currently captains Manchester United yet there are plenty of Mancunian supporters who don’t even want him starting for their team. Robin van Persie usurped him, like Ronaldo, as United’s main attacking threat when he at the club arrived two seasons ago.

The Rooney of today works best as an out and out striker and, with the recent acquisition of Radamel Falcao, he’s probably the third best man in the United squad equipped to fill such a role. This puts Louis van Gaal in a tough position. The Dutch manager has made Rooney his captain. The idea of being able to sell the Scouse forward should he have a change of heart and prefer to marginalise his skipper and instead partner Van Persie and Falcao doesn’t appear to be realistic. No top club in the world is likely to come calling for Wayne these days. Certainly not when you add those £300,000 wage slips into the equation. He simply isn't worth it anymore.

Rooney remains a world class player only in the minds of marketers who know that, despite the progressive dwindling of his star, his name still resonates around the world. Van Gaal will have to find a solution to the Rooney problem and quickly or a storm could well be brewing in the Manchester skies before long.

On the international stage, a similar conundrum exists. Daniel Sturridge is undoubtedly the best out and out striker the country can field these days and has taken the number 9 shirt as his own. Rooney was deployed out wide in the first game of the World Cup against Italy and, despite an assist (he always has put up the numbers, remember) he looked poor and came in for criticism. Fortunately, with a press clamouring for the national side to still be built around him and a manager more than willing to oblige, Rooney was moved back in field for England’s crucial game against Uruguay. The man that switched roles with him was Raheem Sterling who was England’s best player in that opening match. Predictably, despite being indulged and allowed to play where he feels most comfortable at the expense of others, Rooney failed to galvanise his team and England were defeated by Uruguay.

Today, in the immediate aftermath of a drab 1-0 friendly win over Norway in Rooney’s first official match as his country’s new captain, even the English press appear to be waking up to the fact that their golden boy isn’t what he once was. There is a clamour for Sterling - as irony would have it, a teenage prodigy playing on Merseyside - to finally take Rooney’s central role behind Sturridge.

Wayne Rooney was a once in a generation talent. My personal prediction ten years ago was that he would either become one of the greatest players of his time or at least burn out in a blaze of glory a la George Best, giving us a handful of wonderful years before something went wrong and curtailed his progress. Neither really happened.

What came to pass was far less romantic than either scenario. Rooney never did conquer the footballing world, nor did he hit previously unscaled heights before prematurely self destructing like a shooting star. Instead, he just became a very good footballer who had peaked by his early twenties and has been slowly, gradually, fading in front of our eyes ever since.

Enough about Balo, Brendan

Brendan Rodgers likes to talk.

He loves reciting a story with a happy ending, especially if he stars in it.

It’s safe to say that right now the Liverpool manager has built up plenty of goodwill within the club’s fanbase and the media at large. He deserves it, too. He’s done a cracking job with this football club and has obviously improved certain individual players within the squad significantly. If he wishes to chat away to journalists about how he helped Daniel Sturridge finally realise his previously untapped potential or bang on about how he reinstilled confidence into Jordan Henderson’s game then I have no problem with that. Some may see it as self indulgent and categorise such musings as shameless self promotion or David Brent style riffing but, frankly, he’s earned the right to some self congratulation from time to time. He has an ego, like all of us, and if he wants it stroked for some of his achievements then that’s fine by me.

One thing has concerned me lately though when it comes to the topic of Rodgers’ rhetoric. It’s nothing too serious (yet), but the way he has been talking about Mario Balotelli has grated on me. I’ve tried to ignore it and most of the time it’s admittedly been fairly harmless stuff, but after Liverpool’s victory at Spurs it became downright patronising in my eyes.

Saying that Balotelli’s time at Liverpool could be his ‘last chance at a big club’ was justified. He made the same type of public assertion when Daniel Sturridge came to Anfield and frankly, it was fair assessment in both instances. His joke that Balotelli would add ‘Trouble’ to the squad when he was asked about his new signing on live television may have been slightly misguided but it was obviously just a rib. An off the cuff joke not to be taken seriously. Still nothing to see here.

Then came the post-match press conference at White Hart Lane on Sunday.

‘For the first time in his life he marked at a corner. Serious. International player, won three titles in Italy, cups, Champions League. And we were doing corners and he went ‘I don’t mark at corners’. Well you do now...’

Sorry. What?

First of all, the notion that Balotelli has never picked a man up at a corner before is just a complete fabrication. You don’t even need to go and re watch old games from the Italian’s career to know that it’s pure fantasy. The idea of a big centre forward never having been directed to defend a corner under the tutelage of the likes of Jose Mourinho, Roberto Mancini or Cesare Prandelli is, for want of a better phrase, complete bollocks. Even if Balotelli did say that in training (and if he did I’d assume he was kidding) why bring it up in front of the press? What purpose did it serve?

It’s a fairly inconsequential quote on the face of it and, coming off the back of an outstanding 3-0 win, it was unlikely to be scrutinised too much, but that doesn’t make it okay. It was completely patronising and disrespectful towards the player and his former coaches. Worse, it also feeds into the notion that Mario Balotelli is some kind of lazy primadona aimlessly floating along in need of Brendan Rodgers to bring him back down to earth.

Predictably, some people lapped it up. ‘Look at what Brendan said. Mario never even used to bother marking players he was that much of a lad! Brendan will sort him out though. Won’t get away with that here.’ That sort of stuff. It was a line that made people chuckle, no doubt. But it was completely unnecessary of the manager to make that conversation public.

Put yourself in the striker’s shoes for a minute. You’ve just helped your team to a 3-0 victory on your debut. You’ve played pretty damn well given the circumstances and gone off to a standing ovation from the away fans. Then you hear your manager talking about you as if you are some spoilt ten year old who has belatedly found a proper role model who will finally insist that you eat your greens whether you want to or not. If I were Mario and I read those quotes I’d feel like a bit of an idiot.

Balotelli famously dislikes the rumours, half truths and apocryphal tales that surround him. He’s not too fond of the media and their desire to paint him as some immature, detached nincompoop. No wonder. He’s a complicated young man with a few mistakes in his past but he isn’t merely the bumbling comedy act that many would have you believe. Those quotes from Rodgers were worthless. They only served to underline this perception of Mario the class clown who desperately requires a guiding hand from his new headmaster.

I’m sure there was no malice intended from Rodgers and his mouth just got a little carried away in the aftermath of an impressive day’s work, but he needs to rein it in. He’s been quoted as saying Liverpool aren’t going to become ‘The Mario Balotelli Show’, so maybe it would be better if he didn’t add fuel to those particular flames with silly quotes that immediately write headlines for opportunistic journalists out to promote the myth of ‘Mario the Maverick’.

The amount of surprise on show in the aftermath of Balotelli’s debut illustrated just how difficult a task it will be for the player to alter the general perception of him. People we’re apparently amazed that he’d actually worked hard for Liverpool against Spurs! Some have even dared to use it as proof that Rodgers can ‘turn the player around’. It was as if Balotelli was a changed man in their eyes. He’d apparently gone from a lazy git into a workaholic after six days on Merseyside.

Again, this is just pure fiction.

A work shy player unwilling or unable to contribute defensively to his team simply doesn’t play in a Jose Mourinho side no matter how talented he may be (ask Juan Mata). A complete lay about doesn’t lead the line for Italy and destroy one of the best centre halves in world football during a Euro 2012 semi final the way Mario did to Mats Hummels. Preening, uncommitted individuals aren’t usually popular with their peers at any football club for long and yet one need only look to the reaction of Man City’s players to Balotelli’s presence at the Eithad last Monday for confirmation that he was a well liked figure there.

There is no doubt that, when his head drops, Balotelli can lose motivation. While other players will run around more when they’re frustrated, he can sulk and withdraw from a game if things aren’t going his way. Liverpool and Rodgers will no doubt have to cross that bridge when they come to it sooner or later. But this idea that Mario Balotelli is just some rebel without a cause who simply does whatever the hell he feels like every time he steps onto a football pitch is completely unfounded. It needs to be knocked on the head, not propagated further by irresponsible quotes from the player’s new manager.

If Mario Balotelli does succeed and improve at Liverpool Football Club then I will quite happily listen for hours on end to Brendan Rodgers reminiscing and eulogising about the work that went into making that happen. Until then though, I’d rather he keep schtum and let Mario’s football do the talking for him. After all, as Brendan said himself, Liverpool don’t need to become ‘The Mario Balotelli Show’.

Balotelli & Sturridge: Return of the diamond?

I presumed that we’d seen the last of it. When Luis Suarez departed for pastures new, the chances of Liverpool regularly starting matches with two strikers simultaneously appeared remote. They looked remoter still when you factored in the the £20m acquisition of Lazar Markovic who has often played as a winger. Now though, it looks a decent bet that Brendan Rodgers will soon be reverting to the formation that was seemingly devised solely for the purpose of getting Daniel Sturridge and Luis Suarez on the pitch together. That system could, and for my money should, be making a comeback at White Hart Lane this weekend.

I think it’s safe to say that Mario Balotelli didn't come to Anfield to play as a wide forward. We know that Daniel Sturridge isn't particularly enamoured with the prospect of filling that role either. Raheem Sterling, lazily labelled as just another quick English winger in the past, has undoubtedly produced his best work in a red shirt from central areas. Philippe Coutinho looks half the player we all know he can be when he’s asked to play down the flanks. Adam Lallana can do a job on the left or the right but, as is the case with Coutinho, he lacks an electric burst of pace and would appear to be more suited to a role in the middle of the park. The point I’m driving at here is that all of Liverpool’s attacking talent (with the possible exception of Markovic) look to be players who would be best utilised from positions in the centre of the pitch.

Brendan Rodgers has so far opted to line his team up in a 4-2-3-1 and a 4-3-3 formation in the reds’ two league games to date. Liverpool haven’t impressed. Sure, there were periods against both Southampton and Manchester City where they looked pretty comfortable, but something was obviously missing. There was a lack of cutting edge in attack. There was an absence of the relentless pressure that has become synonymous with Liverpool again. There was little of the unbridled, spontaneous chaos that took these lads to the brink of the Premier League title a few short months ago. Counter attacks and build up play in the opening games have looked laboured. Pretty, controlled, methodical, nice, undoubtedly. But laboured nonetheless. You could easily chalk that up to the absence of a certain buck toothed wrecking ball and be done with this whole argument, but the current absence of the attacking verve that Liverpool exhibited last term appears to be largely systemic in nature.

Take the aforementioned Sterling as an example. He was bright early on against Man City playing from the right hand side but, after an impressive first twenty minutes, he didn't receive enough of the ball and gradually faded from view. Paradoxically, his best two moments of the game came when he had vacated his starting post on the right hand side. He fed exquisitely weighted through balls into goal scoring positions for Jordan Henderson and Daniel Sturridge when he was in central areas, not while he was stuck out on the right wing.

Meanwhile, on the opposite flank, Philippe Coutinho was having a shocker. His lack of defensive astuteness repeatedly left debutant Alberto Moreno exposed at full back and the Brazilian never looked comfortable playing from the left. Coutinho’s most outstanding performances under Rodgers have been from a deeper midfield position, not the wing or even the number 10 slot that he was initially expected to occupy when he arrived at the club. Indeed, when he reprised that advanced play-maker role against Southampton on the opening day, he was just as ineffective and isolated as he was at the Etihad. Using Louis van Gaal’s terminology for a moment, Coutinho appears to work best as an 8, not a 10 and certainly not as a winger.

I've focussed primarily on Coutinho and Sterling because they were shining lights in pre-season and two of the players that supporters were looking at to fill the Suarez shaped hole that has been left in this squad. Growing amounts of evidence suggests that if they are to kick on again from their impressive individual campaigns in 2013/14 that progress will be more likely to materialise if they are playing in the positions that they both excelled in during last season.

Which brings us to back to Balotelli, whose arrival conveniently offers Rodgers the option of reverting back to the system that got the best out of our two outstanding young talents - and the team as a whole - by allowing the manager to deploy two strikers regularly.

It’s very possible that Balotelli and Sturridge might not hit it off as a conventional strike partnership. But they might not have to. The prolific Sturridge/Suarez axis was comprised essentially of two individuals doing their own thing. Yes, they combined well at times, but they didn't play in tandem like a Dalglish and Rush or even a Fowler and Collymore. Two mavericks whose first thoughts were ‘how can I score from here?’ found a way to coexist and thrive on the apparent professional rivalry that existed between them to be the ‘main man’ at Anfield. As a result, Liverpool benefited from this by acquiring the most lethal ‘partnership’ in English football while other individuals in the team also benefited hugely.

This begs the question: Why can’t the same happen with Balotelli and Sturridge? Yes, we've all heard how Sturridge longs to be the star man and the focal point of this side, but if he succeeded playing alongside Suarez, why can’t he do the same with Mario in tow? For the sake of the balance of this Liverpool team right now, he may have to.

Sturridge is no doubt a mighty fine forward when he’s playing up front on his own. The way he bamboozled Vincent Kompany and got himself into several promising positions against City illustrated that fact. However, it was nearly game for Sturridge in Manchester on Monday. He’d produce great work only for a last ditch outstretched limb from Kompany, Joe Hart or Pablo Zabaleta to foil him at the crucial moment. City hunted Sturridge in packs and, by hook or by crook, they managed to suppress his threat and keep him and Liverpool off the score-sheet during the time he was alone up front.

When Rickie Lambert entered the fray however, Sturridge appeared visibly liberated. He produced a goal from nothing after excellent work in the right channel and a cross of breathtaking technique for his strike partner. His goal against Southampton curiously also came when Lambert was on the pitch and involved several times in the build up to that match winning strike. For all the talk of him stepping up and becoming the unchallenged focal point of this attack in Suarez’s absence, Sturridge looks as if he will benefit more from having a foil alongside him.

If nothing else, Balotelli’s impending presence in a red shirt should decrease the attention opposing defenders are paying to Sturridge and allow him to play his more natural game of dropping deep, drifting wide and getting involved in the play as and when he sees fit. The pressure of being the only out and out striker who has to hold the ball up and be in central areas regularly should be lifted from his shoulders when the Italian joins him up front. Assuming that Rodgers will use the two strikers at the same time, it seems likely that the diamond will be his preferred method of achieving this.

That would hypothetically leave us with a Liverpool team set up in a system with Coutinho and Henderson behind Sterling in midfield and Balotelli and Sturridge leading the line which looks, on paper at least, a hell of a lot more threatening than anything we've seen against Southampton and City. In a wider context it provides plenty of options and opportunities, too. Joe Allen could play in Coutinho’s position when needed, for instance. Lallana could compete for that same starting berth as well as the number 10 role. Emre Can appears capable of playing at the base of a diamond or even slightly further forward in Henderson’s absence. Even Markovic is capable of playing centrally and adding drive and pace. The diamond looks, to my eyes at least, to offer the best balance for this team right now and would provide every midfielder in the squad with at least one position to compete for in the starting eleven.

Naturally, this is not to say the diamond formation is perfect. Nothing is in football, save for Andrea Pirlo’s facial hair. We know from first hand experience that this particular system certainly isn't flawless.

The most glaring reservation that surrounds the implementation of this system is the captain’s role within it. After all, Steven Gerrard isn't a defensive midfielder. He’s not particularly adept at picking up stealthy players like David Silva when they sneak into his area of the pitch. He doesn't have the legs to track runners as effectively as he once did. He still has the innate instincts of an attacking player. Yet these same problems existed last season when Gerrard initially adopted his deeper position in front of the back four and the team flourished, did they not? They won time and time again despite not having a traditional defensively minded midfield enforcer in the side because the quality of the attacking play they conjured was so high.

So why can’t that be the case again? If the alternative is to keep Gerrard in the same withdrawn position anyway (as it has been in both games this season when different formations have been utilised) while simultaneously blunting our own effectiveness going forward, then it seems to be a no brainer to me. We may as well play an attacking brand of football and die on our swords rather than try to be something we’re not and reduce our chances of success in the attacking third. If Gerrard and Balotelli are to be regulars in this team (and there is no evidence to suggest they won’t be) then it seems logical that the diamond should return.

I thought we’d seen the last of Brendan Rodgers playing with two strikers. I believed that the formation Liverpool used in the latter half of last season was a stopgap and would be discarded this summer. I was wrong. It appears that diamonds might just be forever after all.

Is Super Mario the right man for LFC?

You should know that what you’re about to read isn't going to unbiased.

I love Mario Balotelli. Have done for years. He was born in Palermo where a large chunk of my family still reside. He played for Internazionale and A.C. Milan, the two teams that most of my relatives over there support. I’m a fan of the Azzurri when it comes to the international game and I’m  also partial to an enigmatic, skilful player. Basically, Balotelli ticks all my boxes. But let’s be honest, I’m not alone here am I? Most football fans around the world seem to have a soft spot for Mario Balotelli.

The apocryphal tales of his cash handouts to the needy. Admitting to Noel Gallagher on camera that he returned home with a quad bike when his Mum sent him to John Lewis to purchase an ironing board. The fireworks in the bathroom. That t-shirt at Old Trafford. Everyone loves a bit of Mario.

That being said, ‘risk’ is a word that is going to be used a lot when people are discussing this proposed move to Liverpool. It’s fair to say that Balotelli carriers with him somewhat of a reputation, especially among the English press. His attitude on the pitch can admittedly descend into comical levels of indifference and even laziness when he’s not got his head straight and he’s not afraid of a bust up with a manager or three.

But in truth, there is little risk for Liverpool in this seemingly imminent transfer.

In the current market £16m (the fee that is widely reported to have been agreed between Milan and Liverpool) for a striker is next to nothing. Shane Long has just signed on at Southampton for £12m. If he gets 10 league goals during this campaign he’ll have excelled himself. Championship club Fulham have recently paid Leeds United a similar fee for footballing luminary Ross McCormack. Sunderland bid £14m for Fabio Borini this summer. Signing Italy’s best striker, for a few million quid more than any of those aforementioned players, is practically stealing.

Even if Balotelli flops spectacularly at Anfield and leaves next summer the reds are guaranteed to get their money back and, despite his reputation as a troublemaker, Balotelli’s previous travails have mostly impacted himself rather than any of his team mates. The commonly held notion of him being a bad egg who can disrupt an entire club simply by being is massively overplayed.

His current employers Milan are sadly a club in financial turmoil and without Champions League football these days. Last season was horrific for them as they limped to 8th place in the table. Balotelli was their one shining light during that disastrous campaign. Indeed, he’s been a shining light for them from the moment he arrived back on his home shores - no player has scored more goals in Serie A since he moved back to Italy from Manchester. The forward has netted 26 times in 43 league games for what is now a mid table club. That’s an impressive ratio for any striker, let alone one who has been tasked with saving the team he supported as a kid pretty much single handedly.

Balotelli isn’t the sulking teenager he was at Inter anymore where he fell out with Jose Mourinho (what’s not to like there?) or even the eccentric, moody young man whose relationship with Roberto Mancini crumbled in his last half season at City. He still has his off days and when he’s bad, boy is he bad, but he’s kept his nose clean since returning to Italy and he’s carried Milan’s attacking threat on his shoulders for the past year while their only other top level forward, Stephan El Shaaraway, was absent with a long term injury. He’s scored at a higher rate than he did in his younger days and also helped send England home from Brazil with the winning goal in a World Cup group match this summer (more brownie points from me). Talent wise, in this market, Mario Balotelli is a £40m striker. Minimum.

Links between the player and Liverpool have been there for most of the summer but I’d never seriously considered them to have any foundation. The main reason for my scepticism was centred around the fact that I couldn't really see how Balotelli fitted into a Brendan Rodgers team while Daniel Sturridge was still around. To be honest, current giddy excitement put to one side for a moment, I’m still finding it hard to see exactly how Balotelli is going to play regularly in this Liverpool team. That’s not to say he won’t or shouldn't, his talent almost dictates that he will, but I’m not certain of how this is going to achieved just yet.

He has played out wide in the past for Inter Milan but, at 24 years old, it’s unlikely Balotelli will be signing up to come and play on the wing much. If that is the case then it leaves Brendan Rodgers with a few things to ponder. Does he let Balotelli and Sturridge fight it out for the number nine role in a 4-3-3 formation or does he try and come up with a system that allows his side to play with two top strikers simultaneously as he did last season? Maybe Sturridge will be asked to move wide in games when Balotelli starts centrally as he did at times when he partnered Luis Suarez. Can Rodgers realistically get both of these forwards on the pitch at the same time without unbalancing the rest of the team? Will they even gel together as a partnership if they’re given the chance?

There are many question marks that this Balotelli deal presents. But every one of those question marks can also be viewed as an additional option for Brendan Rodgers. A squad with Balotelli joining Sturridge in it is better than a squad without the Italian forward. Yes, Rodgers will have a real balancing act on his hands and it will be a job and a half for him to keep the plethora of attacking players at his disposal happy and motivated but, compared to the alternative of having only Daniel Sturridge and Rickie Lambert as senior strikers this term, that doesn't seem so bad, does it?

If this transfer deal is concluded - as now seems likely - then the bottom line is that Liverpool will have added significant quality to their squad. They will have an equally talented alternative (or partner) to Daniel Sturridge in their ranks. Forget the headlines and the hyperbole that will inevitably go into overdrive if and when Mario and Brendan pose for pictures with a red scarf, what matters most is what happens on the field and Liverpool are apparently on the brink of bringing one of Europe’s very best strikers to the club.

For £4m more than Shane Long.

Lucas and Gerrard - Just Say No Brendan

Accentuate the positives, eliminate the negatives. 

That’s exactly what Liverpool did during the second half of last season. We all know that Brendan Rodgers’ team was far from perfect during 2013/14, but crucially, as the season went on he got them focussed on what they could do rather than what they couldn't. They imposed their will on games with an attacking brand of maniacal, front foot football regardless of the opposition. Whether it was top sides like Everton or Man City visiting Anfield or middling teams like United and Southampton away from home, Liverpool played their way and asked opponents ‘Can you deal with this?’. The vast majority of teams couldn't and that’s precisely why we ended the season so close to being crowned champions. 

It was curious and more than a little frustrating then, that on Sunday we abandoned that philosophy. Rodgers set his team out against Southampton in a way that didn't get the best out of his players. Two deep defensive midfielders worked great under Rafa Benitez when those lads were the mobile and tenacious Javier Mascherano alongside the serene and canny Xabi Alonso. With an ageing Steven Gerrard and an ailing Lucas Leiva though? Not so much.  

You can easily get bogged down in the numbers game: 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3, 4-1-2-3, 4-1-2-1-2, blah blah blah. People switch off in the face of that stuff and understandably so. The fluidity of modern day football renders such reductive terms as almost meaningless anyway and I have no desire to start banging on about numerical systems here. But if last season illustrated one thing it was that this particular incarnation of Liverpool does not require a babysitter for it’s captain regardless of the physical limitations being enforced upon him by mother nature and father time. Whatever the system, the reds don’t require two defensive midfielders on the pitch simultaneously these days.  

Lucas Leiva should play as a holding midfielder when Gerrard isn't available. Partnering them doesn't work. It rarely has in the past and it shows no sign of doing so in the future. It doesn't help either of them as individuals - one need only look at the amount of criticism they've taken this week, the Brazilian in particular - and it certainly doesn't help the players around them like Jordan Henderson and Philippe Coutinho as we saw on Sunday. So why go with it in the first place against the Saints? 

Well, perhaps the manager decided to pair them up in front of the back four against Southampton in an attempt to add solidity to a team that conceded too many goals last term. Maybe he saw Lucas as a more physical alternative to Joe Allen and decided that was what was required against the imposing midfield duo of Morgan Schneiderlin and Victor Wanyama. In theory, I get that. In practise though, Liverpool were no more secure with Lucas holding Gerrard’s hand than they were when the shape eventually changed and Joe Allen and Henderson played in advance of the skipper. The only team whose threat was diminished by the presence of Lucas and Gerrard appearing in tandem on Sunday was Liverpool. It meant one less body breaking forward. It meant one less attacking player offering for the ball when we had possession deep in our half. The high pressing that became the calling card of this team last season was conspicuous by it’s absence.  

I realise the season is only 90 minutes old and I'm in serious danger of exaggerating the faults with what was ultimately a crucial opening day win, but we've seen this Lucas/Gerrard approach in the past numerous times from Rodgers and it concerns me a little that a manager who has generally demonstrated an acute ability to learn from his mistakes continues to revisit this particular aberration. 

I'm certain I wasn't the only one who groaned a little when the team was released prior to kick off and my dissatisfaction wasn't just down to the absence of the immaculately coiffured Emre Can. It seems to me that almost everyone knows that pairing Gerrard and Lucas together in midfield isn't the way to go these days. It’s a negative tactic in my mind that shows we are more concerned with our flaws than with our qualities. The contrasting fortunes against Arsenal and Everton last season are perhaps the best examples of why seeing Lucas line up next to Gerrard unsettled me on Sunday.  

Last November we went to Goodison Park and played with two defensive midfielders to negate the threat Everton posed between the lines - particularly that of the inform Ross Barkley. Gerrard and Lucas never got near Everton’s young star that day. Barkley drove at and beyond them time and time again. The Blues created enough clear cut chances to win five derbies but somehow we got out of dodge with a point. In the return fixture at Anfield in January, we lined up against an Everton team who many saw as favourites on the day with only Gerrard as a deep midfielder. Plenty of people I've spoken to since have admitted that they shared my personal concern before kick off that Barkley’s athleticism would once again expose the (in theory) isolated Gerrard in our defensive third. We needn't have worried. Everton’s young star barely got a kick because Coutinho and Henderson pressed Everton’s midfield high and cut off the supply line. We decimated Everton and Gerrard strolled through the game. 

Now let’s go back to November again. The reds travelled to north London to take on Arsenal who included Santi Cazorla, Aaron Ramsey and Mesut Ozil in their side on the night. In other words, three players who excel at playing in that gap between the opposition's midfield and defence. To combat this, Rodgers again deployed the Gerrard/Lucas axis. It was no use. Arsenal tampered with us like a cat who has cornered an injured vole. Mikel Arteta ran the game from deep as no one was closing him down and Ramsey and Cazorla bagged the goals in a comfortable 2-0 win for the Gunners. Fast forward to February when Arsenal came to Anfield. They were top of the league and had the best defensive record in the country. We all know what happened next. Philippe Coutinho was put in central midfield alongside Jordan Henderson and the pair of them bullied Arteta, Jack Wilshere, Ozil and co mercilessly. Arsenal could barely muster an attack because every time they tried to play through midfield Coutinho and Henderson were in their faces. Gerrard was left alone to patrol in front of his centre halves and he barely broke into a sweat as he ran proceedings. 

It's important to acknowledge that Gerrard is no specialist defensive midfielder. He didn't grow up learning that craft and his best days were spent as an attacking force, yet Rodgers' ploy of pairing two mobile lads (whether it was Allen, Henderson or Coutinho) ahead of him in midfield meant that it barely mattered as last season progressed. The two players in front of him masked his deficiencies. You don’t need Gerrard to have legs when Jordan Henderson is running a marathon for your team every week and Coutinho or Joe Allen is snapping at the heels of the opposition like a hyperactive jack russell. Gerrard’s influence as a match winner that we relied on for so long wasn't required in the latter stages of the previous campaign. He was free to concentrate on building play from deep rather than having to put out fires all over the pitch and bang in crucial goals from open play. No donkey work for him, just the ball at his magical feet and options ahead of him. It worked spectacularly well. Again, it was accentuating the positives and hiding the negatives.  

We go to the Etihad on Monday and there is no tougher fixture that we will face domestically all season. Last time out we played brilliantly there against City on Boxing Day and came away with nothing. That could easily happen again. They’re a bloody fantastic outfit who can beat anyone on their day. My hope ahead of this match is that, regardless of the eventual outcome, Liverpool go to Manchester and do exactly what they did in that defeat last season. Lucas played the holding role alone in Gerrard’s absence that day while Henderson and Allen went toe to toe with City’s midfield in front of the Brazilian. They created chances, we created chances. It was a thrilling, open game that could have gone either way and demonstrated to the rest of the league that Liverpool could meet the best squad in the country head on and come out looking formidable, even in defeat.  

The worry this time around for me is that we redeploy the same shape we utilised against Southampton. City are great between the lines, with Silva and Nasri wreaking havoc in particular, but I hope that fact doesn't persuade Brendan to start Lucas again. I’d much rather see Jordan Henderson and Emre Can (providing he’s fit) or even Joe Allen going toe to toe with Yaya Toure and Fernando (or little Fernando who happens to be the older Fernando) as was the case in both of those wonderful games against City last season. Sure, such an approach plays to their strengths as much as it does ours and would almost guarantee goals at both ends, but the alternative is to be cautious and full of worry about what they can do while simultaneously significantly reducing our own attacking abilities.  

This Liverpool team hasn't been constructed to eliminate the threat of others by being defensive. It’s been built to attack opponents and it challenges them to be good enough to deal with what we offer. Most can’t. City are a team that can overcome us even on our better days because of their quality, but to my mind we stand a much better chance of being successful if we approach Monday’s game, and the season as a whole, in the same proactive manner we did from December onwards last season. 

It’s time for another throw down between the two best English teams of 2014. It’s time to abandon the caution of Sunday and go back to doing what we do best. 

Monday is the time to once again start accentuating the positives and eliminating the negatives.