The Liverpool Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Steve*
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 44K
  • Views Views 3M
I'd believe you if he hadn't of had massive budgets over the past 10 years.

How is that relevant? Guardiola has had plenty of money and he seems pretty inflexible when it comes to his footballing "philosophy". Money has nothing to do with a manager's willingness to try different styles. You can criticise Jose for many things, but you cannot deny that the man is football's ultimate pragmatist.
 
35-year old retired pensioner who's leaving at the end of season is hardly a game changing substitution. Mourinho keeps making striker excuses despite having a 100m woth of striker force, parks the bus vs Atletico side that was literally made out of cardboard and duct tape, and he gets away with it. But Guardiola's striker option actually *are* pretty ******* ****.

Age has no bearing on effectiveness. Totti's got two years on Pizarro and he's still quality, just like Pizarro is.

See, cut out all of the **** between Guardiola and Mourinho. Guardiola has better strikers, that's a given. But what's interesting is that Jose 'gets away with it' a ******* LOT. Guardiola? He never does. He either crushes or just capitulates, and lately in Europe it's been the latter.

Like I said, if Pizarro is so 'useless' (despite having more goals than starts this season) and Pep was making changes to avoid total embarrassment then frankly he should be lambasted for not having the guts or the nous to make the changes BEFORE they were on the verge of total embarrassment.

Getting hatred from rival fans? That's because Liverpool are relevant again, we're back and the others hate it.



Liverpool's unpopularity among rival fans proves that they are back - This Is Anfield
The Reds have been so poor in recent years that rival fans barely wasted their breath on them, but this superb season has
THISISANFIELD.COM|BY HENRY JACKSON

...wait wut. The majority of neutrals have supported Liverpool this season, dunno where this martyrdom has come from.

He kicked him in his studs, it was a pretty bad tackle

Yeah once the initial pain dies off he's running on adrenaline, he wouldn't have felt anything. Afterwards he was limping pretty badly, that gif makes perfect sense.
 
See, cut out all of the **** between Guardiola and Mourinho. Guardiola has better strikers, that's a given. But what's interesting is that Jose 'gets away with it' a ******* LOT.

Oh i'm right with you there. I have no problem if someone uses embarrassing style to win. In fact its usually hilarious. Its the ****** excuses that go with it that are annoying, the whole little horse, small club in transition narrative that some people have adopted as gospel.
 
Oh i'm right with you there. I have no problem if someone uses embarrassing style to win. In fact its usually hilarious. Its the ****** excuses that go with it that are annoying, the whole little horse, small club in transition narrative that some people have adopted as gospel.

That's HILARIOUS. It makes Chelsea fans seem like cultists. :D
 
Getting hatred from rival fans? That's because Liverpool are relevant again, we're back and the others hate it.



Liverpool's unpopularity among rival fans proves that they are back - This Is Anfield
The Reds have been so poor in recent years that rival fans barely wasted their breath on them, but this superb season has
THISISANFIELD.COM|BY HENRY JACKSON





No, they hate you because you are ***** (generalization yey!) and have Suarez who is a **** as well.

 
So why didn't he go back to slower, more methodical play when he realised Chelsea's deep block wasn't going to do anything other than sit there? He's either inflexible or a bit slow. I mean, the only tactical change he made made Liverpool NARROWER. That's not particularly encouraging.

The real litmus test will come next season, when everyone's figured out Liverpool are a lethal counterattacking side and just decide to set out in a deep block and let Liverpool try and counterattack that. Hull did it earlier this season, putting eight across the centre and letting Liverpool decide what to do, and Rodgers had no answer.
.

Not sure losing one game makes him inflexible. Going by that logic one can also question Mourinho and his methods against Crystal Palace, Sunderland.

Point was Rodgers was flexible enough to change his philosophy. Again why he didn't go back to possession football against Chelsea or slow methodical game? I dont know, they averaged 73% possession against them.

It's easy to say that Rodgers is inflexible giving Chelsea game as example where they failed to score but there are so many examples like making Coutinho play deeper against Everton to control and play some lovely passes to prove that he is smart enough to change and make opposition to think. When Chelsea decide to play defensive game there isn't a lot any attack can do.

All the points about counts for nothing as he couldn't beat West Ham United, Crystal Palace, Sunderland and more importantly ManUtd at OT.

Re the last point I agree. Next season is very important as it's also big test for his squad rotation and man management.
 
And this post shows everything that's wrong in modern football.

Think it would be hard to argue packing the defence and sacrificing 'good' footballing for winning is a modern thing. Catenaccio happened, after all.

Not sure losing one game makes him inflexible. Going by that logic one can also question Mourinho and his methods against Crystal Palace, Sunderland.

Whoa, no no no. I've been on this particular 'Pep is inflexible' horse for a loooong time now. There's very few instances of Pep ever compromising his ideals in his entire managerial history.

Point was Rodgers was flexible enough to change his philosophy. Again why he didn't go back to possession football against Chelsea or slow methodical game? I dont know, they averaged 73% possession against them.

Weird thing is, despite playing against a side that deep, I don't think Rodgers really did change this season's philosophy. Liverpool still played like they were trying to exploit the space behind Chelsea, even when there wasn't any. Neville and Carragher did a great bit of analysis on it that I'll try and find.

It's easy to say that Rodgers is inflexible giving Chelsea game as example where they failed to score but there are so many examples like making Coutinho play deeper against Everton to control and play some lovely passes to prove that he is smart enough to change and make opposition to think. When Chelsea decide to play defensive game there isn't a lot any attack can do.

That's not true at all. If Chelsea's deep defensive block worked THAT effectively then Jose wouldn't play anything else and they'd have gone the season unbeaten. I'll cede that the Coutinho move was an effective one, but I haven't said that Rodgers is incapable of influencing the game, just that he's rather dogmatic in sticking to his chosen philosophy. And even then, he's nowhere near Pep's level at that.

All the points about counts for nothing as he couldn't beat West Ham United, Crystal Palace, Sunderland and more importantly ManUtd at OT.

Certainly this is a criticism of Mourinho. Part of it can be put down to lack of striking options, but Mourinho teams have always has breaking other teams down as their weakest facet.
 
Think it would be hard to argue packing the defence and sacrificing 'good' footballing for winning is a modern thing. Catenaccio happened, after all.



Whoa, no no no. I've been on this particular 'Pep is inflexible' horse for a loooong time now. There's very few instances of Pep ever compromising his ideals in his entire managerial history.



Weird thing is, despite playing against a side that deep, I don't think Rodgers really did change this season's philosophy. Liverpool still played like they were trying to exploit the space behind Chelsea, even when there wasn't any. Neville and Carragher did a great bit of analysis on it that I'll try and find.



That's not true at all. If Chelsea's deep defensive block worked THAT effectively then Jose wouldn't play anything else and they'd have gone the season unbeaten. I'll cede that the Coutinho move was an effective one, but I haven't said that Rodgers is incapable of influencing the game, just that he's rather dogmatic in sticking to his chosen philosophy. And even then, he's nowhere near Pep's level at that.



Certainly this is a criticism of Mourinho. Part of it can be put down to lack of striking options, but Mourinho teams have always has breaking other teams down as their weakest facet.

You could argue catenaccio is part of modern football. It probably isn't, but point stands. Winning over entertainment the audience evey day.
 
You could argue catenaccio is part of modern football. It probably isn't, but point stands. Winning over entertainment the audience evey day.

lol. Harking for the good old days of the 50's? :P
 
Think it would be hard to argue packing the defence and sacrificing 'good' footballing for winning is a modern thing. Catenaccio happened, after all.



Whoa, no no no. I've been on this particular 'Pep is inflexible' horse for a loooong time now. There's very few instances of Pep ever compromising his ideals in his entire managerial history.



Weird thing is, despite playing against a side that deep, I don't think Rodgers really did change this season's philosophy. Liverpool still played like they were trying to exploit the space behind Chelsea, even when there wasn't any. Neville and Carragher did a great bit of analysis on it that I'll try and find.



That's not true at all. If Chelsea's deep defensive block worked THAT effectively then Jose wouldn't play anything else and they'd have gone the season unbeaten. I'll cede that the Coutinho move was an effective one, but I haven't said that Rodgers is incapable of influencing the game, just that he's rather dogmatic in sticking to his chosen philosophy. And even then, he's nowhere near Pep's level at that.



Certainly this is a criticism of Mourinho. Part of it can be put down to lack of striking options, but Mourinho teams have always has breaking other teams down as their weakest facet.
I'd say Rodgers has generally been quite flexible this season. He's played various formations (4-4-2, 4-4-2 diamond, 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1) and is willing to sacrifice his ideology of passing football for counter-attack, in various games against 'bigger' sides. Perhaps he wasn't as flexible as he could've been against Chelsea, but I wouldn't say that sums up his managerial style this season.
 
Kind of funny to see you post this in response to a loss vs a manager who is renowned for playing for draws and tight 1-0's (and getting them consistently).

Jose shows otherwise. Chelsea were never coming to play against you

Tonight is exactly why i said what i did... It's all well and good playing defensive but it doesn't always work

Mourinho set up for a 0-0 in Spain, knowing an away goal could be crucial and then not getting one started with 6 defenders on the pitch tonight... He has been eliminated in 3 of the 4 semi finals he has played now

He is just too cautious at times
 
Oh, you've post a picture of a munich taunt. Let me just post one of the 96 and then we can both agree on how bad supporters can be.

Back to Manchester silly Manure (if thats really you're actually from).

Once was enough, but this is second time he's calling us Manure. If this guy doesn't get banned, then something is very wrong with you.
 
Tonight is exactly why i said what i did... It's all well and good playing defensive but it doesn't always work

Neither of us claimed it did. However, it is consistent and it can be pulled off. Chelsea didn't lose because they played cautiously tonight, they lost because they were lax defensively.

He has been eliminated in 3 of the 4 semi finals he has played now
? Not sure how he could have lost all but 1 semi final considering he's won the competition twice lol.
 
Back
Top