Liverpool fc v West Ham Utd 1.30 KO

Turtyturd

vicwatson wrote: »

If we were wasting time then the ref would have dished out the yellows

Eh he did.

eagle eye

Excellent defensive display from West Ham, James Collins MoM imo.

Morzadec

Absolutely not good enough going forward.

Yet again at home if we don't score in the first 25 minutes or so we look as likely to lose as to win.

Coutinho, Enrique and Agger all had very good games

citytillidie

vicwatson wrote: »

If we were wasting time then the ref would have dished out the yellows

He did, Joey O'Brien was booked for wasting time

vicwatson

COME ON YOU IRONS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

5live

And everton leading 2-1

Jelle1880

vicwatson wrote: »

COME ON YOU IRONS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Laptop survives another day :pac:

vicwatson

Turtyturd wrote: »

Eh he did.

O'Brien got a card, who else?

mike65

Diame wasting time in the corner!

FT 0-0

After scoring so many goals this calender year a huge disappointment. Coutinho making 95 mins was the only big positive to take out of that. Luis is looking like someone who could do with a rest if the truth be told.

vicwatson

Come on EVERTON !!!!!!!!!!! YAYY

el dude

I'd be curious to know if Liverpool made contact from a single one of their 12 corners. Gang of tarts when it comes to attacking an aerial ball.

Still had enough chances to win, and the Tomkins tackle on Gerrard is a pen all day long, he's already made the foul before he gets a poxy contact on the ball.

Who was the co-comm btw? He ws terrible, kept repeating the same ****e over and over again.

5live

Liverpool have 2 types of corner.

Blocked by the first man or not blocked by the last man.

Gbear

el dude wrote: »

I'd be curious to know if Liverpool made contact from a single one of their 12 corners. Gang of tarts when it comes to attacking an aerial ball.

Still had enough chances to win, and the Tomkins tackle on Gerrard is a pen all day loing, he's already made the foul before he gets a poxy contact on the ball.

They should just stop bothering with putting them into the box. It's just giving away possession.

I don't know how a player of Suarez' quality can be that awful.

Most of the time Coutinho, Assaidi, Sturridge, Enrique, Johnson and Suarez touched the ball in the final 3rd they made a balls of it.

Couldn't control the ball, couldn't pass it five yards. Only the players to blame today. At least we didn't concede a retarded goal. Agger was pretty good.

vicwatson

Liverpool came up against a stubborn Hammers today. Hard for any team break our defence down today.

Well done Collins and Tonka in particular

pjmn

Delighted with that point - Collins was immense....

Hammer Archer

Missed the second half cos I was at a GAA game, but I'm absolutely delighted with that point

Next year! Surely!

vicwatson

We were well deserving of a point, had chances but alas we didn't take them yet again.

Collins and Tonka were great together (until Tonks went off injured near the end)

The_Kew_Tour

How did O Brien play?

me89

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

How did O Brien play?

Very solid again.
He really has been great for us this season.

The_Kew_Tour

me89 wrote: »

Very solid again.
He really has been great for us this season.

Good to hear. Rated him before.

markie29

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Good to hear. Rated him before.

should be in the irish squad as cover for the full back positions

The_Kew_Tour

markie29 wrote: »

should be in the irish squad as cover for the full back positions

Agree with you 100%

vicwatson

But alas Trapps still overlooks him, a solid regular player in the premier league and was playing Stephen Ward instead !! A joke really.

rob316

Made it to first and only game of the season yesterday and my first ever game in the kop.

Awful awful game west ham only ever wanted a point and it showed time wasting and longs balls from the off.
Pool were wasteful, didnt pass enough, passed sideways way too often. Too fullbacks were awful going forward both just kept walking into there man. Every break was slowed down by the worst pass they could make.

Way too much of this trying to walk the ball into the net., we are not barcelona! :mad:

Crossing and corners are just terrible I dont think we tested the keeper once.

It was my first game of the season so I couldnt really gauge the opinion on Rodgers but it was certainly mixed from what i did hear.

Defence was good but it was barely tested, Reina wouldnt of had a more comfortable game all season I'd say.

What has happened to the atmosphere in Anfield! Outside of the Kop you could hear nothing and even then the Kop gave up chanting after 15mins I'd say.

Sounds cliched but to stand in the KOP holding up my scarf during YNWA the hairs really stood up on the back of neck. The moment of silence for the 96 was special too.

All in all great to catch a match but its far easier to see the problems with the team been there than watching it on the box.

vicwatson

west ham only ever wanted a point and it showed time wasting and longs balls from the off.

Yes we love trying NOT to score, it makes life so much more interesting :rolleyes:

mike65

West Ham clearly had little interest in trying to score. 35% possession made that clear.

Hammer Archer

mike65 wrote: »

West Ham clearly had little interest in trying to score. 35% possession made that clear.

Yet Diame had a great chance in the first half, Collison had a header cleared off the line and we should have had a penalty. But yeah, very little interest in ending 50 years without a win in Anfield. Should really have gone all out attack from the start seeing as we've conceded 12 in the previous 5 outings in Anfield.

Kev.

Hammer Archer wrote: »

Yet Diame had a great chance in the first half, Collison had a header cleared off the line and we should have had a penalty. But yeah, very little interest in ending 50 years without a win in Anfield. Should really have gone all out attack from the start seeing as we've conceded 12 in the previous 5 outings in Anfield.

Ive read that 3 times now and still cant get what your saying...

Hammer Archer

Kev. wrote: »

Ive read that 3 times now and still cant get what your saying...

It was said (by two people) that we had little interest in scoring. I pointed out that we had two great chances along with a stonewall penalty appeal turned down. Doesn't sound like a team disinterested in scoring. Indeed, I'm not sure how a mere possession stat can show a team has little interest in scoring.

My last two sentences were an attempt at sarcasm that probably didn't come through very well.

me89

mike65 wrote: »

West Ham clearly had little interest in trying to score. 35% possession made that clear.

Madrid had the same possession against barca twice and beat em both times so that hardly proves anything.

We had some great chances and should have had a penalty.

Kess73

mike65 wrote: »

West Ham clearly had little interest in trying to score. 35% possession made that clear.

For a team disinterested in scoring, they certainly had me squirming in my seat a few times.

They set themselves up to be hard to score againt alright and lost a lot of possession as a result, but still managed to almost nick a goal or two.

Morzadec

To be fair, on chances, West Ham looked just as likely to score as us once we failed to score in the opening 20 minutes or so.

We've seen it in countless games this year that if we fail to capitalise on early dominance and pressure then it's anyone's game.

West Ham came with a gameplan to stifle to us and exploit our weakness against a deep-lying, stubborn, organised defence. You can only take your hat off and say Allardyce and the defence prepared well, and asked a question of the Liverpool attack - are you good enough to break us down? We were not.

In the 2nd half West Ham knew they were winning the defensive war and became a little more adventurous with Jarvis being an outlet on the counter. They could easily have won the game.

Their gameplan was the correct one to take and was executed well, helped along the way by an often sloppy, sluggish and ultimately impotent Liverpool attack which, on the day, was way off the standards expected.

We were not good enough.

It gets discussed to death on here whenever a 'weaker' team doesn't roll over, open up and just take a pounding, but there is more than one way to play football and there's no right way. I don;t know why this needs to be repeated and why people can't understand it.

You play to your strengths, you play to the other teams weaknesses, you take each game and each situation as it comes, judge your strategy based on this and attempt to execute it correctly.

West Ham did all of this and Liverpool can have no complaints.

Chucky the tree

I think anyone claiming that West ham set out with their main priority being scoring a goal obviously watched a different match to most people. They sat back and defended, if they nicked at goal on the counter or at a set piece obviously that would have been a bonus but that still doesn't take away from the fact that they had little interest in trying to score. Having little interest does not mean have none at all by the way.

Here Precious2

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I think anyone claiming that West ham set out with their main priority being scoring a goal obviously watched a different match to most people. They sat back and defended, if they nicked at goal on the counter or at a set piece obviously that would have been a bonus but that still doesn't take away from the fact that they had little interest in trying to score. Having little interest does not mean have none at all by the way.

We were watching different games so. Take the red tinted spectacles off chucky.

Hammer Archer

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I think anyone claiming that West ham set out with their main priority being scoring a goal obviously watched a different match to most people. They sat back and defended, if they nicked at goal on the counter or at a set piece obviously that would have been a bonus but that still doesn't take away from the fact that they had little interest in trying to score. Having little interest does not mean have none at all by the way.

You have destroyed us three of the previous four times we've played in Anfield (two 3-0 defeats preceded by 0-0 and 4-0). Given those stats, exactly what is wrong with being defensive and trying to score using our main strength (i.e. set pieces)? We were hardly going to go all out attack were we? Especially given the attacking options you have (Suarez, Coutinho etc.) and three of our main players (Reid, Noble and Carroll) being sidelined.

Kess73

Chucky the tree wrote: »

I think anyone claiming that West ham set out with their main priority being scoring a goal obviously watched a different match to most people. They sat back and defended, if they nicked at goal on the counter or at a set piece obviously that would have been a bonus but that still doesn't take away from the fact that they had little interest in trying to score. Having little interest does not mean have none at all by the way.

Think that is being harsh on them tbh. They set themselves up to suit their own strengths rather than that of their opponents. I think they had plenty of interest in scoring, but only had limited chances due to being the weaker team.


If West Ham came to Anfield and set themselves up to attack, they possibly would have shipped a few goals and have even less goal scoring chances themselves. In my eyes they came to Anfield last Sunday and set themselves up in a manner that gave themselves the best chance of not conceding and also the best chance of scoring against a team that has struggled against defensive set ups.

Would have loved to have watched a win on Sunday, but West Ham were well worth their point, and tried their best when they could to get all three.

Chucky the tree

I never said there was anything wrong with how West Ham set up. It was perfectly acceptable and expected. I don't think they should have played it any other way and deserved their point. I just don't see the problem in people pointing out the fact that West Ham set up defensively and had little interest in scoring - I think it's a 100% correct assessment. That doesn't mean West Ham shouldn't be allowed do it or I am pissed off at them because of it. They got their game plan spot on, an it's what most of the teams below us do at Anfield so I'm well used to seeing it now.

vicwatson

mike65 wrote: »

West Ham clearly had little interest in trying to score. 35% possession made that clear.

Eh 43% according to BBC Sport Website

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21986364

Liverpool had 19 shots of which 12 were on target

United had 10 shots of which 4 were on target

Really not that much difference for a team away from home

Take a look at the other (score) draw on Sunday with Spurs v Everton - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21986330

Spurs had 19 shots of which 9 were on target

Everton had 10 shots of which 5 were on target

Yet Everton also had 43% of possession away from home also