Liverpool v Napoli 20.00 hrs Channel 5

monkey9

DOC09UNAM wrote: »

But that's the thing, it practically was the full team, bar those three.

and n'gog was one of the best out there tonight, never stopped running, if only he was a bit more keen with an eye for goal he would have buried one maybe two.

Ah yeah, i'm not saying that was a reserve side or anything. But if Roy was taking this match as seriously as Sunday, tonight side would not be the one he would put out.

But yeah, it was still strong enough! I still think it's a fantastic win over a decent Napoli side who i feel are taking this competition more seriously than ourselves at the moment.

If we manage to get to the knockout stages, thing we will see a full strength Liverpool side!

monkey9

stumpypeeps wrote: »

FYP

I disagree. I think Napoli are a really decent side! The group we're in is pretty tricky so we're doing ok at the moment!

MR NINE

Gerrard had a good game and all but people are giving him too much credit I think. His second goal was a penalty his third goal was a case of being in the right place at the right time (lovely finish though) and his first was a touch on the jammy side (though he did throw himself at it and deserves credit for his commitment an dedication). What impressed me most about Gerrards performance was that he put himself about in the first few minutes of the second half and seemed to single-handedly increase the urgency about the whole team. Although he obviously had a good game I think its unfair to say it was a one man team out there tonight etc because there were a few positive second half performances.

MR NINE

monkey9 wrote: »

I disagree. I think Napoli are a really decent side! The group we're in is pretty tricky so we're doing ok at the moment!

I agree Napoli are a good side as they showed in the first half, thoroughly outplayed us. They were brutal in the second half though.

opr

SlickRic wrote: »

if he's honest with himself he'll know we were shít for the most part, and that he has a special player who got us out of a hole.

Interview after the game said we were unlucky in the first half and didn't deserve to be 1 down.

Opr

Le King

SlickRic wrote: »

i hope Hodgson enjoys this, because he's had so much pressure on him it's untrue.

i just hope he really took note tonight when he looks at the game in the cold light of day.

if he's honest with himself he'll know we were shít for the most part, and that he has a special player who got us out of a hole.

if he's honest he'll now know Poulsen is not good enough.

I'd say he'll still play Poulsen at the weekend. Hopefully not but I can see it happening. If Poulsen is in the middle and Merieles is out of position I won't be betting on Liverpool.

Hopefully Torres can find a few goals for the weekend. Chelsea need to be beaten and beaten well. At least Liverpool will be full of confidence for the weekend now.

I still think Chelsea are far too strong atm. Bástards :P

SlickRic

opr wrote: »

Interview after the game said we were unlucky in the first half and didn't deserve to be 1 down.

Opr

i missed the interview.

that delusion doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

Le King

SlickRic wrote: »

i missed the interview.

that delusion doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

He pretty much said that Liverpool were very unlucky in the first half and that Napoli were a good team to beat.

kingshankly

MR NINE wrote: »

Gerrard had a good game and all but people are giving him too much credit I think. His second goal was a penalty his third goal was a case of being in the right place at the right time (lovely finish though) and his first was a touch on the jammy side (though he did throw himself at it and deserves credit for his commitment an dedication). What impressed me most about Gerrards performance was that he put himself about in the first few minutes of the second half and seemed to single-handedly increase the urgency about the whole team. Although he obviously had a good game I think its unfair to say it was a one man team out there tonight etc because there were a few positive second half performances.

what does he have to do for gods sake, that was Roy of the rovers stuff from our captain everything he did was 1st class

DOC09UNAM

MonkeyTennis wrote: »

that wasnt close to the best 11 we have.

I never said it was the best 11, but it is the team roy thinks is strongest.

MR NINE

kingshankly wrote: »

what does he have to do for gods sake, that was Roy of the rovers stuff from our captain everything he did was 1st class

I think he had a very good game. However, I disagree with the one man team remarks.

dfx-

I was only watching from the 58th minute onwards, but it was shockingly bad from Liverpool. Really insipid going through the motions stuff. Napoli were comfortable with Gerrard as bad as anyone. Arguable free out for Gerrard's challenge on the keeper..

cantgetright

kingshankly wrote: »

what does he have to do for gods sake, that was Roy of the rovers stuff from our captain everything he did was 1st class

No dispute, he is the dogs but that was a bit of a lucky hat-trick. 3rd goal was a great finish, would have probably been easier to go round keeper.

eagle eye

SlickRic wrote: »

i missed the interview.

that delusion doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

What delusion? You were extremely unlucky to be 1-0 down at the break, it was an error from Poulsen that gifted them a goal.

Can you tell me how many real chances they had outside of the goal?

As far as I can remember that was their only shot on target in the whole first half. So you would have to consider them unlucky to go in 1 down. Napoli were the better team on balance in the first half but they didn't create much.

SlickRic

eagle eye wrote: »

What delusion? You were extremely unlucky to be 1-0 down at the break, it was an error from Poulsen that gifted them a goal.

Can you tell me how many real chances they had outside of the goal?

As far as I can remember that was their only shot on target in the whole first half. So you would have to consider them unlucky to go in 1 down. Napoli were the better team on balance in the first half but they didn't create much.

they didn't create much 1st half, but they had most of the game. easily. and were around our box enough in that first half.

we gave the ball away stupidly an awful lot, and they used the ball well.

we would have been fortunate enough to go in level.

2nd half, though Gerrard inspired the team, we didn't create much at all either. all 3 goals of ours also came from mistakes.

i'm not trying to get at Hodgson, in fact i've given him credit for tonight and taking Poulsen off early enough in the 2nd half, i just don't think we were particularly unlucky to be a goal down given the balance of play.

in the end, it would've been a travesty to lose, a draw would have been fair enough given the general performance of both teams over the 90 minutes, and we won because of Gerrard.

i do agree, Napoli were a very good team to beat.

eagle eye

SlickRic wrote: »

they didn't create much, but they had most of the game. easily. and were around our box enough in that first half.

we gave the ball away stupidly an awful lot, and they used the ball well.

we would have been fortunate enough to go in level.

How many chances did they create in the first half? How many shots on target? How many shots even?

I don't see how you can say you would have been fortunate to go in level when the other side didn't create chances for themselves even though they were the better team.

SlickRic wrote: »

2nd half, though Gerrard inspired the team, we didn't create much at all either. all 3 goals of ours also came from mistakes.

i'm not trying to get at Hodgson, in fact i've given him credit for tonight and taking Poulsen off early enough in the 2nd half, i just don't think we were particularly unlucky to be a goal down given the balance of play.

in the end, it would've been a travesty to lose, a draw would have been fair enough given the general performance of both teams over the 90 minutes, and we won because of Gerrard.

i do agree, Napoli were a very good team to beat.

You were unlucky to have to play against 11 men for the whole game. N'Gog didn't have his shooting boots, he should have scored at least one. Gerrard came on and lifted the team and they played much better. You have to give Roy credit for bringing him on at halftime in fairness. He then took off Poulsen and brought on Ecclestone when he seen that Liverpool were on top and Napoli were sitting back. Again another good substitution.

End result is a third victory on the trot for Liverpool. A lot of players who will be bursting a gut to try and improve as they know the manager will give them a chance. And a rested Torres. Was Maxi rested too? Gerrard should be pretty fresh and full of confidence the weekend after 45 minutes full of excellence. Lucas is another who was pretty much rested for the game having only had a few minutes tonight.

I can't see any reason to be crying or giving out about anything. I watched Hodgson's interview and I though he was fine.

And just to add, most managers will always say they thought they were unlucky even when its clearly not true.

flahavaj

What about bringing Lucas on at 1-1? He would have been happy to settle for the draw. Luckily for Liverpool his captain had other ideas.

Revolution9

flahavaj wrote: »

What about bringing Lucas on at 1-1? He would have been happy to settle for the draw. Luckily for Liverpool his captain had other ideas.

Lucas set up the third.
He was a box to box midfielder before Rafa had him playing as a holding mid. He can be creative.

eagle eye

It was a choice of Skrtel, Kelly, Wilson or Lucas. N'Gog was injured and had to go off.

flahavaj

Was N'Gog injured, I thought it was tactical? If he was then fair enough.

Even so it makes the decision not to name Pacheco amongst the subs all the more baffling.

CR 7

flahavaj wrote: »

Was N'Gog injured, I thought it was tactical? If he was then fair enough.

Even so it makes the decision not to name Pacheco amongst the subs all the more baffling.

It was not long after the leg break attempt, but i don't remember him struggling with it. It just seemed like an excuse to bring lucas on if anything.

Revolution9

flahavaj wrote: »

Was N'Gog injured, I thought it was tactical? If he was then fair enough.

Even so it makes the decision not to name Pacheco amongst the subs all the more baffling.

N'Gog was on the end of a bit of a horror tackle. Napoli player could've broken the young lad's leg.
Wasn't running quite as quickly after it. Taken off shortly after.


Pacheco's omission is a complete joke. Fear he'll want to leave in January.

flahavaj

Park Ji Sung wrote: »

It was not long after the leg break attempt, but i don't remember him struggling with it. It just seemed like an excuse to bring lucas on if anything.

Thats what I though, obviously the tackle was horrendous, but he played on, he wasn't limping visibly as he went off and there was no mention of it on commentary AFAIR. Could be wrong though, I was only half watching.

Revolution9

Park Ji Sung wrote: »

It was not long after the leg break attempt, but i don't remember him struggling with it. It just seemed like an excuse to bring lucas on if anything.

flahavaj wrote: »

Thats what I though, obviously the tackle was horrendous, but he played on, he wasn't limping visibly as he went off and there was no mention of it on commentary AFAIR. Could be wrong though, I was only half watching.

Just read a post match comment from Roy:

Hodgson added: "We are assessing it. We didn't take him off because of the knock on the shin, we took him off because of a little bit of cramp."

redzerdrog

considering the price we paid for poulsen is he worst liverpool transfer since the souness days? seriously makes you appreciate the legend that is igor biscan;)

Revolution9

redzerdrog wrote: »

considering the price we paid for poulsen is he worst liverpool transfer since the souness days? seriously makes you appreciate the legend that is igor biscan;)

Robbie Keane, Aquilani

Chucky the tree

Dossena is up there. Gotta laugh, Poulsen helpd set up Naopli's first goal while Dossena got the assist for Liverpools.

opr

The one thing that changed the game tonight tactically was bringing on Eccleston. The Gerrard sub only served to make us even narrower and it was only when he came on and gave us proper width and stretched their backline that allowed Gerrard more space to operate and do his thing. The lack of width which was something that was plainly obviously to everyone watching the game took Roy 65 minutes to figure out.

I actually don't like slating Roy constantly especially when we have won the game and I praised him after the first leg but its not like I am knocking him retrospectively. I stated during the game that Jova was the only out ball and our lack of proper width was killing us. I also said that I thought Roy had finally figured it out when he brought on Eccleston. It should and would have been too little to late had Gerrard not come to the rescue with a phenomenal half of football. The victory will help gloss over what I feel was another set of bizarre and downright tactically woeful decisions from Roy.

Opr

eagle eye

opr wrote: »

The one thing that changed the game tonight tactically was bringing on Eccleston. The Gerrard sub only served to make us even narrower and it was only when he came on and gave us proper width and stretched their backline that allowed Gerrard more space to operate and do his thing. The lack of width which was something that was plainly obviously to everyone watching the game took Roy 65 minutes to figure out.

I actually don't like slating Roy constantly especially when we have won the game and I praised him after the first leg but its not like I am knocking him retrospectively. I stated during the game that Jova was the only out ball and our lack of proper width was killing us. I also said that I thought Roy had finally figured it out when he brought on Eccleston. It should and would have been too little to late had Gerrard not come to the rescue with a phenomenal half of football. The victory will help gloss over what I feel was another set of bizarre and downright tactically woeful decisions from Roy.

Opr

I completely disagree with your accusation that he only figured things out after 65 minutes. Firstly remember he had Jovanovic on the pitch out wide in the first half and it wasn't working. He took him off at halftime and Liverpool improved. Early in the second half Gerrard was making a big impact. Also very early in the second half N'Gog missed a sitter from six yards from a ball by Mereiles, Gerrard hit the rebound over the bar. N'Gog then almost put Shelvey through but he couldn't control the ball, and then there was that terrible header from Shelvey from a cross by N'Gog. All those chances occurred before the introduction of Eccleston.

All those efforts along with dominating since halftime meant that Napoli started to sit back and they would have tried their best to kill the game from then on but the introduction of Eccleston gave Liverpool the width to spread them out again. Hodgson made that substitution when it was necessary.

livinginkorea

Just downloaded and watched the game. Great stuff. The young lads are doing well, NGog needs to practice taking shots on the volley on his weaker side more. Spearing had some great passes but some flops too.

The guy who fouled N'Gog and should have been sent off set up the peno. Karma for you!

For a competition that we are not supposed to care about, we are doing very well in it!

Roll in Chelsea. At least we will have a decent crack at them I recon after the result last night.

redzerdrog

Revolution9 wrote: »

Robbie Keane, Aquilani

Both didnt have the best of times but they contributed 10 times more than it looks like poulsen ever will

Revolution9

redzerdrog wrote: »

Both didnt have the best of times but they contributed 10 times more than it looks like poulsen ever will

They both cost us far more money.
Not many great players we could get for the 4.5 mill we spent on Poulsen.

But the 20m (give or take) we spent on Keane could've been used for a a world class player.
The 17m on Aquilani could've been used on a world class fit non-injury plagued player.

Poulsen's rubbish, but his signing isn't as costly as those two

DOC09UNAM

Revolution9 wrote: »

They both cost us far more money.
Not many great players we could get for the 4.5 mill we spent on Poulsen.

But the 20m (give or take) we spent on Keane could've been used for a a world class player.
The 17m on Aquilani could've been used on a world class fit non-injury plagued player.

Poulsen's rubbish, but his signing isn't as costly as those two

Poulsen cost 6.5 million I thought?

The fact of the matter is, ye got a good bit of money back for Keane, what was it, 15m back for him?

Ye still own Aquilani, and he is playing well in Italy, so I can see him being either sold onto Juventus for a majority of the money, or they might call him back in January if they are allowed.