Liverpool vs Reading 2/1/10 FA Cup 3rd Round Match Thread

starbelgrade

HashSlinging wrote: »

I think the players themselves have a lot to answer for with the performances, its simple to blame Rafa as he's been cast into a stage act but calling him Tactically inflexible.. now dont get me wrong I think he's a tactical genius.. he's working with some players that shouldn't be wearing a red jersey, how much responsibility has he had for bringing all of the players in.. do you know ??

To be a good manager, you not only have to be tactically adept on the pitch, but also in the boardroom.

Otherwise, yr just a coach.

SlickRic

starbelgrade wrote: »

Rafa has lots of flaws - not great in the transfer market, not great at winning trophies & spends far too much time writing stuff in a notebook instead of actually managing the team on the field.

i don't know if you're taking the p*ss, given the end of your post, but these are not his flaws.

he's fine in the transfer market; he could do a bit better when buying players in that £6-12m bracket, but he's been great at spending £12m+ on players.

nobody's perfect in the transfer market though.

he's won more trophies than Wenger has in the same 5 years. (i'm not saying he's a better manager, before you go down that road.)

he's stubborn, which is sometimes a strength, and sometimes a weakness.

his flaws mostly stem from the rigidity of his system. when things go wrong, there is no plan B.

HashSlinging

starbelgrade wrote: »

To be a good manager, you not only have to be tactically adept on the pitch, but also in the boardroom.

Otherwise, yr just a coach.

Ever hear of office politics ?

starbelgrade

HashSlinging wrote: »

Ever hear of office politics ?

I've also heard of good office managers & bad ones. The good ones usually get good results & get good performances from their staff. The bad ones spend a lot of time looking busy & send a lot of e-mails, or write stuff in notebooks instead of actively doing something, like encouraging / b*lloxing their staff.

Melion

Who got MOTM? I really hope it was Lucas, he was immense again today

RasTa

Melion wrote: »

Who got MOTM? I really hope it was Lucas, he was immense again today

McAnuff and was deserved I thought.

colly10

Melion wrote: »

Who got MOTM? I really hope it was Lucas, he was immense again today

He did well in the first half, immense is pushing it a bit. I wouldn't be his biggest fan but his first half performance is the first time I seen him and felt that he is likely to become a good player

dannydiamond

flahavaj wrote: »

No, he did OK in the build up to the goal

He practically scored the goal!

Gerrards shot was tame, no way it beats the keeper without that (very clever imo) dummy from Kuyt.

Credit where credit's due in fairness.He was by no means 'terrible'.


No way did he play anywhere as well as Torres either, Nando was by far our best player today, did someone actually say that?

flahavaj

dannydiamond wrote: »

He practically scored the goal!

Gerrards shot was tame, no way it beats the keeper without that (very clever imo) dummy from Kuyt.

Credit where credit's due in fairness.He was by no means 'terrible'.


No way did he play anywhere as well as Torres either, Nando was by far our best player today, did someone actually say that?

Someone quoted match ratings from goal.com, gave Kuyt 6.5 and Torres only 6. Kuyt's was the highest of any Pool player. Utter bollo*ks IMO.

starbelgrade

dannydiamond wrote: »

Gerrards shot was tame, no way it beats the keeper without that (very clever imo) dummy from Kuyt.

Since when was missing to connect with a cross considered "clever" as opposed to "lucky that it went in"?

Never mind the offside.

Melion

starbelgrade wrote: »

Since when was missing to connect with a cross considered "clever" as opposed to "lucky that it went in"?

Never mind the offside.

He had no intention of touching the ball.

And he was clearly onside

Any other nonsense you'd like to post?

dannydiamond

starbelgrade wrote: »

Since when was missing to connect with a cross considered "clever" as opposed to "lucky that it went in"?

Never mind the offside.

:rolleyes:

dannydiamond

flahavaj wrote: »

Someone quoted match ratings from goal.com, gave Kuyt 6.5 and Torres only 6. Kuyt's was the highest of any Pool player. Utter bollo*ks IMO.

Ta, I just saw it, I agree.

Most of the other ratings were far too generous aswell.

K-9

starbelgrade wrote: »

Since when was missing to connect with a cross considered "clever" as opposed to "lucky that it went in"?

Never mind the offside.

I wont mind the offside, eh, because he was clearly onside.

Hoki

Who gives a shi/t if he was onside/offside, the goal stood and it didnt hide the fact that once again we were shi/t tonight .

Reading are on a horrible run and are pretty much the whipping boys of the championship. We fielded as strong a lineup as we possible could and we fell so far short of the mark its bordering on ridiculous.

We struggled to get a draw there yet a lot of people here are making excuses for the outcome. Fair enough - teams up it a touch for the cup but we should be still putting this Reading side to the sword,comfortably.

I think its a shockingly bad result and it only further proves how much in the shi/t we really are.

Podge2k7

starbelgrade wrote: »

Since when was missing to connect with a cross considered "clever" as opposed to "lucky that it went in"?

Never mind the offside.

Firstly Kuyt dummied it on purpose.

Secondly if you think this is offside you need to go to specsavers:

monkey9

I'm struggling to comprehend why anyone would think Kuyt had a good game tonight. He had a first touch like a teenage virgin getting it on with a MILF

I said it earlier, lets just beat them at Anfield and move swiftly on from this sorry mess

starbelgrade

Podge2k7 wrote: »

Firstly Kuyt dummied it on purpose.

Secondly if you think this is offside you need to go to specsavers:

Busy night on the Photoshop again.