DS Forums

 
 

Liverpool Supporters Thread (Part 21)


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-12-2015, 17:13
Eddie hunter
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,156
In the last page or two there has been far too much navel gazing and digs between fans or almost ganging up on unpopular posters - this is not what the football forum should be about. I like that well known phrase if you have not got anything good to say then it is usually best to say nothing - some of us would do well to take that on board. If you do not like a post try to just ignore it in other words. Maybe it is stating the obvious but it should be about discussing football!!: p - lets try to keep to that from now on
Alan, I wish to reply and then I will leave it alone.

I find it staggering the way this has gone. Ive cut your post down but I largely agree with the sentiment. You modify language used and obviously act within the T&Cs of the forum and that is great up to a point.

However I find it shocking that when people (presumably me included) pull up other posters for their disrespect it ends up being us that are called out.

My understanding of Liverpool fans on forums and this one in particular is that there is a zero tolerance policy for anyone mocking or making digs at Heysel or Hillsborough. Would that be a fair assumption? That goes beyond the "banter" or anything else even on fan specific sites?

Yes two posters on this forum have done just that. One is now banned who claimed to be a Liverpool fan yet said "Get over Hillsborough". Even after this happened they still had people on this thread conversing with them. Equally another poster was discovered to have been retweeting things relating to Heysel and they are being actively defended now too! Im pretty sure that as a United fan if i came on here and made those same comments to you directly you would be absolutely instantly reporting me and rightly so. Yet this is continually tolerated while people are happily slating people for pointing this out. No one attacking the poster for the comment or for the hypocrisy of their behaviour but plenty ready to attack the messengers.

I can't pretend I even begin to understand.
Eddie hunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 04-12-2015, 19:07
alan29
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 20,480
Maybe I'll pop back in for hopefully a pleasurable read in a couple of days. Maybe it will be less like a school playground then.
alan29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 19:08
misawa97
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 11,516
12 Goals is a LOT of goals. And you ask which of those goals actually made the difference in terms of results? A lot of them and BIG ones at that, you could go to the Crystal palace 3-3 game when we had it wrapped up and won...whats does BR do? He replaces Sturridge with coutinho at 78 mins.. when he has Moses and Agger on the bench who could have tightened it up... BIG MISTAKE... You mention the "Gerrard slip" we actually lost that game 2-0 with ANOTHER Chelsea goal at 90 minutes.. There was 6 minutes of xtra time to be played.. Klopp will tell you how many goals could have been scored in that time.. and did we score them ? No why? Because Chelsea had a manager who knew a good team must be built upon a strong defense. We did overrun many teams in that season BUT the bottom line is when it really mattered, the team did not deliver, because of our defensive frailties.
But as I pointed out the 12 Goals didn't really see a major difference between the stats of the two sides. If the defensive frailties were that bad unlike city then why did city only win one more game and Liverpool lost no more games than city did.

The reality is most goals we were conceding were not directly effecting results in a negative way.
misawa97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 19:29
shaneomax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,061
But as I pointed out the 12 Goals didn't really see a major difference between the stats of the two sides. If the defensive frailties were that bad unlike city then why did city only win one more game and Liverpool lost no more games than city did.

The reality is most goals we were conceding were not directly effecting results in a negative way.
Crystal Palace 3- 3 Liverpool = 3 goals conceded, 2 pts lost.
Liverpool 0-2 Chelsea = 2 goals conceded, 3 pts lost
WBA 1-1 Liverpool = 1 goal conceded , 2 pts lost
Liverpool 2- 2 Aston Villa 2 goals conceded, 2 pts lost
Chelsea 2-1 Liverpool 2 goals conceded 3 pts lost.
Man city 2- 1 Liverpool 2 goals conceded 3 pts lost
Everton 3- 3 Liverpool 3 goals conceded 2 pts lost (scoring 3 and still drawing? again?)
Arsenal 2-0 Liverpool 2 goals conceded 3 pts lost
Newcastle 2-2Liverpool 2 goals conceded 2 pts lost
Swansea city 2 - 2 LIverpool 2 goals conceded 2 pts lost
Hull City 3 - 1 Liverpool 3 goals conceded 3 pts lost
Liverpool 0 - 1 Southhampton 1 goal conceded 3pts lost

25 Goals of our 50 conceded (thats half the amount) 30 pts lost...I did the math for you. What is shockingly obvious is some of those 2-2 and 3-3 draws would have easily been 3 pts but.. for our defense. I am sorry to say it mate but you have to say our defense cost us dearly and 30 pts is a lot of points to drop.
shaneomax is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 19:37
Grouty
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: The Nth East
Posts: 21,589
We should put 50 past the Mags, in the first half!
Grouty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 19:42
Parthenon
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,777
Crystal Palace 3- 3 Liverpool = 3 goals conceded, 2 pts lost.
Liverpool 0-2 Chelsea = 2 goals conceded, 3 pts lost
WBA 1-1 Liverpool = 1 goal conceded , 2 pts lost
Liverpool 2- 2 Aston Villa 2 goals conceded, 2 pts lost
Chelsea 2-1 Liverpool 2 goals conceded 3 pts lost.
Man city 2- 1 Liverpool 2 goals conceded 3 pts lost
Everton 3- 3 Liverpool 3 goals conceded 2 pts lost (scoring 3 and still drawing? again?)
Arsenal 2-0 Liverpool 2 goals conceded 3 pts lost
Newcastle 2-2Liverpool 2 goals conceded 2 pts lost
Swansea city 2 - 2 LIverpool 2 goals conceded 2 pts lost

21 Goals of our 50 conceded (thats almost half the amount) 24 pts lost...I did the math for you. What is shockingly obvious is some of those 2-2 and 3-3 draws would have easily been 3 pts but.. for our defense. I am sorry to say it mate but you have to say our defense cost us dearly and 24 pts is a lot of points to drop.
24 points is a lot to drop? If a team drops only 24 points in a season they'll end up with 90 points, which is usually enough to win the league. Losing at City, Chelsea and Arsenal is hardly disastrous. A point at Everton (who finished 5th that season) was a good result regardless of the score. Draws away at Swansea and Newcastle were hardly bad results either. We wouldn't have any more points if we'd gone to those grounds and held on for 0-0s.

The only real bad results there are the draws to Villa and West Brom and the home loss to Chelsea.
Parthenon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 19:57
shaneomax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,061
24 points is a lot to drop? If a team drops only 24 points in a season they'll end up with 90 points, which is usually enough to win the league. Losing at City, Chelsea and Arsenal is hardly disastrous. A point at Everton (who finished 5th that season) was a good result regardless of the score. Draws away at Swansea and Newcastle were hardly bad results either. We wouldn't have any more points if we'd gone to those grounds and held on for 0-0s.

The only real bad results there are the draws to Villa and West Brom and the home loss to Chelsea.
Edited it, I missed out the losses to the mighty Southhampton and the 3-1 thrashing by the silverware kings Hull city..Adds up to 30 pts, and yes any team that drops 30 pts will end up with 84 points, and that is not always enough to win the league. Many of those 2 points could have been turned into 3. When you score 2 or 3 goals you expect to win... provided your team has an organise defense which we never had under Rodgers, not in 3 years... Kevin Keegan suffered a similar fate in the 95/96 season.. And the 13/14 season for Liverpool has echoes of that. No matter what you say, the most successful managers ALWAYS build their teams upon a solid defense first, as Klopp has done. Because if you don't in the end you get figured out, and teams like Stoke start to pummel you 6-1.
shaneomax is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 20:01
misawa97
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 11,516
Crystal Palace 3- 3 Liverpool = 3 goals conceded, 2 pts lost.
Liverpool 0-2 Chelsea = 2 goals conceded, 3 pts lost
WBA 1-1 Liverpool = 1 goal conceded , 2 pts lost
Liverpool 2- 2 Aston Villa 2 goals conceded, 2 pts lost
Chelsea 2-1 Liverpool 2 goals conceded 3 pts lost.
Man city 2- 1 Liverpool 2 goals conceded 3 pts lost
Everton 3- 3 Liverpool 3 goals conceded 2 pts lost (scoring 3 and still drawing? again?)
Arsenal 2-0 Liverpool 2 goals conceded 3 pts lost
Newcastle 2-2Liverpool 2 goals conceded 2 pts lost
Swansea city 2 - 2 LIverpool 2 goals conceded 2 pts lost

21 Goals of our 50 conceded (thats almost half the amount) 24 pts lost...I did the math for you. What is shockingly obvious is some of those 2-2 and 3-3 draws would have easily been 3 pts but.. for our defense. I am sorry to say it mate but you have to say our defense cost us dearly and 24 pts is a lot of points to drop.
Honestly you are reaching. How many points do you expect to drop in the season. The team regardless will always drop points.

Adds up to 30 pts, and yes any team that drops 30 pts will end up with 84 points
So the team who conceded 12 less goals dropped 28 points.

Again I ask how many points do you expect the side to drop?
misawa97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 20:01
shaneomax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,061
Honestly you are reaching. How many points do you expect to drop in the season. The team regardless will always drop points.
Edited it as I missed out two more losses pls read it again. And you said most of the goals were not directly affecting results in a negative way, but 50% yes half of the goals conceded costed us points.
shaneomax is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 20:04
misawa97
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 11,516
Edited it as I missed out two more losses pls read it again. And you said most of the goals were not directly affecting results in a negative way, but 50% yes half of the goals conceded costed us points.
The same amount of losses as city that season. 6 losses and 5 draws really isn't bad at all.
misawa97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 20:05
shaneomax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,061
Honestly you are reaching. How many points do you expect to drop in the season. The team regardless will always drop points.



So the team who conceded 12 less goals dropped 28 points.

Again I ask how many points do you expect the side to drop?
Well we dropped 30pts and that is a LOT of points to drop and some of those games were clearly winnable/ won already but for our defence... to put it into a different persecective... if another manager had the score at 3-0.. say Capello..do you think we still would have lost that game? I don't.
shaneomax is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 20:06
shaneomax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,061
The same amount of losses as city that season. 6 losses and 5 draws really isn't bad at all.
I wonder if City had a team at 3-0.. if they would have lost that game.. I don't think so, not with Kompany back there.
shaneomax is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 20:27
mikeyddd
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,975
I wonder if City had a team at 3-0.. if they would have lost that game.. I don't think so, not with Kompany back there.
If you want to look at football in terms of whataboutary, quoting Cantonao7, you could argue that if the linesman had got one key decision right in the match away to Man City then Liverpool would have won the title. Beside it was discussed at length at the time, and ,most concluded that the number of goals conceding was a bi product of the attacking style which was adopted during that season.
mikeyddd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 20:43
snukr
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,410
Edited it, I missed out the losses to the mighty Southhampton and the 3-1 thrashing by the silverware kings Hull city..Adds up to 30 pts, and yes any team that drops 30 pts will end up with 84 points, and that is not always enough to win the league. Many of those 2 points could have been turned into 3. When you score 2 or 3 goals you expect to win... provided your team has an organise defense which we never had under Rodgers, not in 3 years... Kevin Keegan suffered a similar fate in the 95/96 season.. And the 13/14 season for Liverpool has echoes of that. No matter what you say, the most successful managers ALWAYS build their teams upon a solid defense first, as Klopp has done. Because if you don't in the end you get figured out, and teams like Stoke start to pummel you 6-1.
The reason Liverpool didn't win the league that season is because of Rodgers tactical naivity in the Chelsea and Crystal Palace games, he decided to go gung ho against Palace mistakingly believing we could overtake City's gd, at 3-0 up we should have shut up shop instead of going for more goals. We wouldn't have come anywhere near winning the league if we'd been more defensive minded that season, all championship winning sides drop points during the season, we scored more than twice as many as we conceded. City finished the season strongly winning all of their final few games when we hoped they'd drop points, ultimately it wasn't to be, but it was our most memorable season in recent times and that's because of our attacking, not because we played boring defensive football grinding out 1-0 wins.
snukr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 20:44
shaneomax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,061
If you want to look at football in terms of whataboutary, quoting Cantonao7, you could argue that if the linesman had got one key decision right in the match away to Man City then Liverpool would have won the title. Beside it was discussed at length at the time, and ,most concluded that the number of goals conceding was a bi product of the attacking style which was adopted during that season.
The fact of the matter is, our defense was bad, very bad and cost us. I always find it amusing about how people praise Rodgers for "almost" winning the title. He was never going to win it with his style of play, sure it was fun to watch, and some of those games were very close wins due to our ability to score more than the opponent, Fulham and Swansea spring to mind and I could name many more. Kevin Keegan had a similar style and he also won nothing. So glad Klopp has been appointed and has proven how Liverpool failed under Rodgers. The difference between Klopp and Rodgers, well there are many but the one thing that springs to mind is that when Rodgers took over... top 4 was his target... Klopp took over and winning the league is his target. That is the difference.
shaneomax is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 20:46
shaneomax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,061
The reason Liverpool didn't win the league that season is because of Rodgers tactical naivity in the Chelsea and Crystal Palace games, he decided to go gung ho against Palace mistakingly believing we could overtake City's gd, at 3-0 up we should have shut up shop instead of going for more goals. We wouldn't have come anywhere near winning the league if we'd been more defensive minded that season, all championship winning sides drop points during the season, we scored more than twice as many as we conceded. City finished the season strongly winning all of their final few games when we hoped they'd drop points, ultimately it wasn't to be, but it was our most memorable season in recent times and that's because of our attacking, not because we played boring defensive football grinding out 1-0 wins.
It was attractive and entertaining yes, but so is Klopp's style, being defensively organised does not mean griniding out 1-0 wins, it means knowing when to shut up shop and get that result. You said it yourself, Rodgers was too gung ho and simply too inexperienced.
shaneomax is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 21:02
ChristmasCake
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London
Posts: 20,217

In the last page or two there has been far too much navel gazing and digs between fans or almost ganging up on unpopular posters - this is not what the football forum should be about. I like that well known phrase if you have not got anything good to say then it is usually best to say nothing - some of us would do well to take that on board. If you do not like a post try to just ignore it in other words. Maybe it is stating the obvious but it should be about discussing football!!: p - lets try to keep to that from now on
We were discussing football till that moron came in and derailed the thread with his puerile nonsense.

Look Alan, I respect you, but we're not at school and you're not teaching any more.

I'm not going to change what I think and feel because you want everyone to get along.

I respond in here the same way I would if I was chatting to someone in the pub.

We're not 6, and not every opinion is valid.

Someone can post disrespectfully about Hillsborough and Heysel and you take issue with them being pulled up?

He adds no value to this thread, even when we tried to get back to discussion, oh look it's derailed again because of him.

If he just stayed away from the thread there would be none of this.

I get more in depth football analysis out of my four year old nephew and all he says is, "Spurs are the best!"

There is nothing wrong with robust, rigorous discussion, and criticism is fine when warranted.
ChristmasCake is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 21:05
ChristmasCake
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London
Posts: 20,217
It was attractive and entertaining yes, but so is Klopp's style, being defensively organised does not mean griniding out 1-0 wins, it means knowing when to shut up shop and get that result. You said it yourself, Rodgers was too gung ho and simply too inexperienced.
If it wasn't for Rodgers being gung-ho would we even have been in the position to throw it away?
ChristmasCake is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 21:11
TheMunch
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 6,975
Seems my post has been deleted amongst others. As well as politely telling the troubling poster to not be so troubling it WAS on-topic, in relation to English sides in Europe. I can't be bothered typing all that again. Would be nice if the mods read what they were deleting now and then so we didn't have to put up with this kind of thing happening all the time. I don't appreciate on-topic posts being deleted because someone decides to attack another poster. It shouldn't be that difficult to just edit my quote to remove the deleted post from the quote (and the bit of my post responding to them), but whatever...

I'll try again...

Man City have players to do well in Europe, but are a bit over-reliant on certain players, their squad itself is a bit weak outside the main players. It's unfortunate when their main players includes an amazing yet injury-prone striker (sound familiar?) and a great yet injury-prone centre-back (sound familiar?), while Chelsea have the players, the squad AND manager to go very far in Europe. If they were playing the way they should, if they were the side we know they're capable of being they should be walking this league and they'd be a side to avoid in Europe. If it weren't for injury issues Arsenal have the players to do well this season, unfortunately it's looking unlikely due to them dropping points in the group.

In the Europa League, ourselves and Spurs are looking quite good. Both are playing well at the moment, and I can't comment on Pochettino but Klopp seems to be taking this competition seriously (and it seems other cups, too) and I think both clubs can do well in the competition and I'd like to see us try and win it, and I honestly think we win it. I'm at least confident of us going for it and taking it seriously, at least.
TheMunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 21:15
mikeyddd
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,975
If it wasn't for Rodgers being gung-ho would we even have been in the position to throw it away?
Rodgers and his team took us on one of the best journeys in recent times. Hopefully Klopp will take us further, but he has done nothing yet that Rogers hadn't done before him. Besides it's always difficult to make comparisons in football, because no two managers are dealt the same hand.
mikeyddd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 21:23
ChristmasCake
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London
Posts: 20,217
Rodgers and his team took us on one of the best journeys in recent times. Hopefully Klopp will take us further, but he has done nothing yet that Rogers hadn't done before him. Besides it's always difficult to make comparisons in football, because no two managers are dealt the same hand.
I agree, and I certainly don't agree with those trying to re-write history...
ChristmasCake is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 21:26
alancracker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 4,933
My final word on the matter (I hope)

Anyone talking about Hillsborough on a LFC page or forum needs to be very sensitive and if they are not then they can expect to be pulled up on it - no ifs or buts about it, There is no topic on which we feel more strongly - and the LFC fan who told us to 'get over Hillsborough' was just unbelievable. Same goes for Heysel, other disasters and probably a few other sensitive topics too.

What I think is prob unnecessary and what to see cut out if poss is quoting posts and saying things like 'why did you say that it adds nothing to the discussion' or 'you are only repeating what I have already said.'

Yes I do agree that certain posters post stuff that says next to nothing but in general unless it is offensive I ignore it. Yes I also think Eddie and CC are 2 of the most thoughtful DS posters but just cos others are not up to your high standard do not rip into them that's all - and that goes for all of us including me. Heck in recent pages there has even been a row between 3 or 4 MUFC fans which somehow has spilled over onto the LFC thread - what's that all about!!
alancracker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 21:36
TheMunch
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 6,975
In other news, saw this earlier.

Reports in Germany claim Borussia Dortmund centre-back Neven Subotic has his sights set on a January move to Liverpool.



The 26-year-old has found himself out of the Dortmund team under new manager Thomas Tuchel, with midfielder Sven Bender preferred to him at the back.

In an interview with German publication Bild, Dortmund’s sport manager Michael Zorc believes Subotic is desperate to end his time in Germany and join former manager Jurgen Klopp at Liverpool.

“It is an unusual and difficult situation for him (Subotic),” he said.

“Neven is dealing with it all very professionally, but he is obviously not happy. There are strong indications that he will say his farewells in January.

“There are always messages coming from England that Klopp would take Subotic to Liverpool.”



Subotic was a key figure during Klopp and Dortmund’s march to consecutive Bundesliga titles in 2011 and 2012, and the 2013 Champions League Final, forming a formidable centre-back pairing with Mats Hummels.

He also played under the 48-year-old at Mainz, with Klopp taking the imposing defender with him to Dortmund in the summer of 2008.

Reinforcements are clearly needed at right-sided centre-back for Liverpool, with Kolo Toure well past his best and Martin Skrtel forever inconsistent, despite some good recent performances.

Subotic would represent a good signing for the Reds, despite his lack of playing time, and would definitely help make them look more sturdy at the back.

There are no guarantees that the move will come to fruition, but of all the Dortmund players linked with Liverpool, the Serb feels the most likely to join next month.
http://www.thisisanfield.com/2015/12...singly-likely/


Subotic played under Klopp at both Mainz and Dortmund, and that quote suggests he might be off in January. I don't know if we'll be making many changes in January (it's not a good time to make a lot of changes) but this looks like one that could happen.

Could bring his mate Hummels as well if he wants.
TheMunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 21:59
jeffiner1892
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 8,723
I know January isn't a great time for a lot of changes but then we've had a few good transfers in January too.
jeffiner1892 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2015, 22:11
clarky323
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4,824
I know January isn't a great time for a lot of changes but then we've had a few good transfers in January too.
Before this week I would have said all we really need is a couple of full backs. But with Jon Flanagan back in training and Brad Smith's impressive cameo against the Saints, maybe we don't need any back ups in that position any more.

Possibly a midfielder is needed too but nothing too major.
clarky323 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:20.