The Liverpool Thread

[Scouseinthehouse]

Well said. You played better, but had than been Rodgers everyone would have been saying you were lucky not to lose. You were better than before, but it definitely wasn't an excellent first outing. It's not even the best you have played this season.

Had we played like that under Rodgers he'd still be in a job.

 

[Mike.]

Had we played like that under Rodgers he'd still be in a job.

No he wouldn't have been in a job, because the issue has been over a year of inconsistency, not a few games. You had games like this last season

 

[Scouseinthehouse]

No he wouldn't have been in a job, because the issue has been over a year of inconsistency, not a few games. You had games like this last season

And that is the point. If Rodgers had the team working as hard for him and being as organised and defending as well as that as a team he'd not only of still been in a job, he'd of won a league title.

Don't confuse lack of chances/ goals for Sat'day not being an excellent first outing from a manager with three days training ground work and a slew of major injury's. The difference between he and Rodgers was markable. We've not looked as organised in a 4 or defended as well as a team since Rafa.

 

[Tezzz]

Well said. You played better, but had than been Rodgers everyone would have been saying you were lucky not to lose. You were better than before, but it definitely wasn't an excellent first outing. It's not even the best you have played this season.

If it was rodgers we'd have passed the ball around the back all game whether we were drawing or losing and probably the latter.

 

[Tezzz]

Carlo Ancelotti denies claims that he rejected Liverpool job | Football News | Sky Sports

Harry Redknapp looks eve more of a **** now.

 

[Mike.]

If it was rodgers we'd have passed the ball around the back all game whether we were drawing or losing and probably the latter.

That's a fair point actually. and then he would have called you outstanding.

 

[Mike.]

And that is the point. If Rodgers had the team working as hard for him and being as organised and defending as well as that as a team he'd not only of still been in a job, he'd of won a league title.

Don't confuse lack of chances/ goals for Sat'day not being an excellent first outing from a manager with three days training ground work and a slew of major injury's. The difference between he and Rodgers was markable. We've not looked as organised in a 4 or defended as well as a team since Rafa.

I'm not confused about anything. You realise I'm a match analyst right? I do this for a living, and without trying to be arrogant, I'm really rather good at it. Lack of chances and lack of goals is absolutely what you have to taken into consideration.

Actually he would have needed them to be organised AND scoring the tonne of goals they did that season.

 

[Subtle]

And that is the point. If Rodgers had the team working as hard for him and being as organised and defending as well as that as a team he'd not only of still been in a job, he'd of won a league title.

Holy mother of revisionism, Batman: if the players had been fighting for Rodgers, you would have won the title? Really? I mean you can you question the time since then, both from the club and from the manager, but to actually go back to your best achievement in the last decade and just retcon Rodgers out of it entirely? That's some next level Liverpool logic right there.

I'm not confused about anything. You realise I'm a match analyst right? I do this for a living, and without trying to be arrogant, I'm really rather good at it. Lack of chances and lack of goals is absolutely what you have to taken into consideration.

Actually he would have needed them to be organised AND scoring the tonne of goals they did that season.

How dare you blaspheme against the Holy Church of The Koppite Klopp?

 

[LFCMarshall]

Holy mother of revisionism, Batman: if the players had been fighting for Rodgers, you would have won the title? Really? I mean you can you question the time since then, both from the club and from the manager, but to actually go back to your best achievement in the last decade and just retcon Rodgers out of it entirely? That's some next level Liverpool logic right there.

That season doesn't exist and even if it did Rodgers had no bearing on any of that anyway...

 

[epic terrorist]

How dare you blaspheme against the Holy Church of The Koppite Klopp?

The funniest thing ill read today

 

[Mike.]

That season doesn't exist and even if it did Rodgers had no bearing on any of that anyway...

You'll remember me criticising the defending throughout that season. But the way BR is being written out is crazy.

 

[Scouseinthehouse]

I presume you missed the point about organisation and defending Subtle back there and didn't just pick up on working for the manager to be facetious?

And our 'best achievement the past decade' happened May 25, 2005 in Isranbul. But yer know. Revisionist Internet history and all that.

 

[Scouseinthehouse]

I'm not confused about anything. You realise I'm a match analyst right? I do this for a living, and without trying to be arrogant, I'm really rather good at it. Lack of chances and lack of goals is absolutely what you have to taken into consideration.

Actually he would have needed them to be organised AND scoring the tonne of goals they did that season.

With the the greatest of respect (and no, I didn't know your job); if you're seriously suggesting there wasn't a big difference in the way we defended as a team and how different the back 4 as a group where to the previous three years then you either aren't very good at it or more so I presume you haven't been watching us in depth.

We had 8 first teammers missing, with ZERO inexperienced forwards. In three days he made the only real adjustments he could and got the players working there backsides off and being disciplined and organised as a team defensively. The goals and chances will come when both the missing players return and they work more with together with what Klopp wants. It's flip to say 'it wasn't even your best performance of the season' when you take everything into account. The only real great performance this year was the first half against Arsenal. Even Norwich and Villa at home nobody felt confident when we scored as we were so disorganised as a team defensively. He made an imeadiate and very noticeable change to that and the overall attitude and work ethic of the players.

It was an excellent, without being spectacular, first outing after three days work and all the absentees at an in form team that had just destroyed arguably the best team in the league there last home game. To get the very noticeable above mentioned changes over with so little work is a testament to the man in itself.

To suggest otherwise is to have totally unrealistic expectations of a new manager with three days work with his players.

Again, if Rodgers had sorted that side of his team he consistently neglected for 3 years he'd be sat with a title now. That was ALL he had to do 2 years ago the career year his forwards had.

 

[Subtle]

I presume you missed the point about organisation and defending Suntle back there and didn't just pick up on working for the manager to be facetious?

It was more to do with the absurdity of including it with the other two. Those are legitimate reasons why you didn't win it, but commitment really is not. I mean, even if you go with this revised narrative of the players doing it for Stevie and Suarez being the central force, the players were still ridiculously motivated.

If anything, the enduring thing you probably should be taking from that title effort is just how good Rodgers was at getting his players motivated. Just because it didn't work for successive seasons doesn't mean it wasn't there. Sure he couldn't pick them up from the disappointment, but to say that he wasn't at least partly responsible for getting them there in the first place is madness.

 

[Mike.]

With the the greatest of respect (and no, I didn't know your job); if you're seriously suggesting there wasn't a big difference in the way we defended as a team and how different the back 4 as a group where to the previous three years then you either aren't very good at it or more so I presume you haven't been watching us in depth.

We had 8 first teammers missing, with ZERO inexperienced forwards. In three days he made the only real adjustments he could and got the players working there backsides off and being disciplined and organised as a team defensively. The goals and chances will come when both the missing players return and they work more with together with what Klopp wants. It's flip to say 'it wasn't even your best performance of the season' when you take everything into account. The only real great performance this year was the first half against Arsenal. Even Norwich and Villa at home nobody felt confident when we scored as we were so disorganised as a team defensively. He made an imeadiate and very noticeable change to that and the overall attitude and work ethic of the players.

It was an excellent, without being spectacular, first outing after three days work and all the absentees at an in form team that had just destroyed arguably the best team in the league there last home game. To get the very noticeable above mentioned changes over with so little work is a testament to the man in itself.

To suggest otherwise is to have totally unrealistic expectations of a new manager with three days work with his players.

Again, if Rodgers had sorted that side of his team he consistently neglected for 3 years he'd be sat with a title now. That was ALL he had to do 2 years ago the career year his forwards had.

Er except you don't just pick one part and run with with and ignore the rest as you have done, such as the lack chances, goals, and still being exposed for all that extra stability. Things like the fact you were struggling the minute the press dropped off.

Your entire post is one of a fan justification. Not a match analysis. and that's the difference between us.

To call it excellent in any kind of anaylsis would be ridiculous.

As for how good I am: It's good enough for me to have my analysis played out weekly on TV in two different sports (Rugby and Football) for the last two years, so I guess I must know something.

 

[Scouseinthehouse]

And again you're completely ignoring the context.

Three days work, a slew of injuries and an away game at an in form rival.

 

[Mike.]

And again you're completely ignoring the context.

Three days work, a slew of injuries and an away game at an in form rival.

All clubs go through injuries. Even with the context it still wouldn't be an excellent display. Unless your use of the word excellent is incredibly loose

 

[Subtle]

This discussion in a nutshell

 

[Scouseinthehouse]

It was more to do with the absurdity of including it with the other two. Those are legitimate reasons why you didn't win it, but commitment really is not. I mean, even if you go with this revised narrative of the players doing it for Stevie and Suarez being the central force, the players were still ridiculously motivated.

If anything, the enduring thing you probably should be taking from that title effort is just how good Rodgers was at getting his players motivated. Just because it didn't work for successive seasons doesn't mean it wasn't there. Sure he couldn't pick them up from the disappointment, but to say that he wasn't at least partly responsible for getting them there in the first place is madness.

Please, enlighten us to when I haven't credited Rodgers for his part in '13/14.

He took arguably the 6th best side going in and came within a game of the title. I've never not credited him for that on here.

But what I also don't do is go OTT on him that year and look at the key factor that season. A player having a Worldie, career year. The first four games we were shockingly poor. We eaked out some 1-0's that we were lucky to. Stumbled through Notts County the league cup. Then lost at home to Sourhampton. Then Suarez returned and was other Worldly for 34 games. That, along with Stirridge being for the majority, was what brought around the run in the main. ALL Ridgers had to do was get the defensive side organised. But instead he had no earthly on how to do that. Conceding a historically bad number of goals that were overshadowed by the 100 plus we scored the other end. Suarez by his mere nature pulls every other player along with him and his play on the field demanded extra from everyone else. To deny he was the catalyst that year is revisionist history and then some.

Rodgers deserves credit for being the manager of that team. But by the same token it can WELL be argued his naivety and cluelessness in certain areas cost us the league title that should of been wrapped up well before we played Chelsea.

 

[ICYUNVME]

Er except you don't just pick one part and run with with and ignore the rest as you have done, such as the lack chances, goals, and still being exposed for all that extra stability. Things like the fact you were struggling the minute the press dropped off.

Your entire post is one of a fan justification. Not a match analysis. and that's the difference between us.

To call it excellent in any kind of anaylsis would be ridiculous.

As for how good I am: It's good enough for me to have my analysis played out weekly on TV in two different sports (Rugby and Football) for the last two years, so I guess I must know something.

Where/what do you analyse if you don't mind my asking.