Everton V Liverpool 5.30pm Sat 7th Feb

Kirby

rossc007 wrote: »

Didn't Everton have one shot on goal? Is English your first language?

They had 6 shots on goal.

monkey9

Gavlor wrote: »

Not at all. After listening to his waffle for 18 months I'm positive that he's full of it. He benefited last season from the defensive foundations set down by moyes but once he had enough time to implement his own system things went to pot. I think it's 11 or 12 wins in almost 40 games. That's relegation form.

I will say this though, our defensive performances have improved over the last couple of games so maybe he's copping on a bit.

This has nothing to do with Everton.

I cannot believe the positive press he got at Wigan. They were a side who seemed to be a mainstay in the Premier League.

Martinez had Wigan battling relegation every season before they eventually went down.

It's just interesting you're against him. I would be too.

Brian?

Laois_Man wrote: »

That's bound to happen when you're starting with 3 holding midfielders in front of a back 4 and then actually replace one of those holding midfielders with a 3rd centre back for the last 5 minutes....at home.....against the team in 7th :rolleyes:

I thought that was a reasonable move. We went to a 3-4-3 and looked livelier. Only mistake was taking off Besic instead of Barry.

Kirby

monkey9 wrote: »

This has nothing to do with Everton.

I cannot believe the positive press he got at Wigan. They were a side who seemed to be a mainstay in the Premier League.

Martinez had Wigan battling relegation every season before they eventually went down.

It's just interesting you're against him. I would be too.

They did win the FA cup. They nearly knighted Redknapp for doing that, and he spent a lot more money doing it. It's not that surprising he had some positive press.

Will I Amnt

Brian? wrote: »

I thought that was a reasonable move. We went to a 3-4-3 and looked livelier. Only mistake was taking off Besic instead of Barry.

Besic was done. Thought he was excellent for most of his time on the pitch but he really started to fade at that stage and was deservedly hooked.

Laois_Man

Brian? wrote: »

I thought that was a reasonable move. We went to a 3-4-3 and looked livelier. Only mistake was taking off Besic instead of Barry.

I think the reason Everton looked livlier is coz they knew the moves werent gonna break down anymore every time Naismith got the ball....coz he was gone off. Barkley replacing him was the difference.

Kirby

Lukaku is just so, so lazy. Not unfit, that's something else. He's lazy. He really does have the look of a man who knows that after 28 million was spent on him, he can do whatever he wants. Sure Martinez could drop him for a game or two like he has done before, but he will always be back in the team regardless.

monkey9

Kirby wrote: »

They did win the FA cup. They nearly knighted Redknapp for doing that, and he spent a lot more money doing it. It's not that surprising he had some positive press.

It's why these two managers amaze me

Gavlor

monkey9 wrote: »

It's why these two managers amaze me

They are both darlings of the press and tend to give access all areas to journalists. They're brilliant PR merchants in fairness

Gavlor

Kirby wrote: »

Lukaku is just so, so lazy. Not unfit, that's something else. He's lazy. He really does have the look of a man who knows that after 28 million was spent on him, he can do whatever he wants. Sure Martinez could drop him for a game or two like he has done before, but he will always be back in the team regardless.

???

He ran his boll0x off this evening chasing after hopeless long balls and trying to close down the entire back line on his own.

5starpool

Kirby wrote: »

They had 6 shots on goal.

6 shots vaguely towards goal, 1 shot actually on goal.

Anyone saying Everton dominated is not familiar with how football works.

citytillidie

evo2000 wrote: »

Everton were destroying them for the last 20 min, coleman coulda had 2 goals

I dunno how you worked that out when Everton only had one shot on target the entire game

Rayne Wooney

I think Everton will finish 9th/10th and a good chance the top 6 will remain the same with Liverpool just outside

Both managers will feel the pressure at the end of the season, both spent a lot of money

Kirby

Gavlor wrote: »

???

He ran his boll0x off this evening chasing after hopeless long balls and trying to close down the entire back line on his own.

He walked through the second half. He was caught offside constantly from laziness. Not going too early clever runs....just strolling back. Repeatedly. Charging the keeper a couple times in a game does not excuse this.

Cyrus

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

I think Everton will finish 9th/10th and a good chance the top 6 will remain the same with Liverpool just outside

Both managers will feel the pressure at the end of the season, both spent a lot of money

Course you do

Buford T. Justice XIX

Gavlor wrote: »

They are both darlings of the press and tend to give access all areas to journalists. They're brilliant PR merchants in fairness

I am struggling to think of one good defender, even one ok defender that Martinez has bought. He seems to lead a charmed existence in the PL despite that though.

Ranchu

Statistically Wigan should have been relegated in every season Martinez was in charge due to their spending being in the bottom three in the league on wages. Teams that do that get relegated.

It was a poor derby and both teams are a shadow of themselves from last season. On the plus side it's another clean sheet and apart from the shot off the post liverpool never really forced a decent save.

The inclusion of Barry week in week out is upsetting me and there's a lot of work to be done before next season but I certainly wouldn't be calling for Martinez head at all.

mada999

Quandary wrote: »

Coutinho and Sterling off and Gerrard stays on the pitch despite offering nothing all game?

Maybe Coutinho was injured which is fair enough but taking off Sterling over Gerrard was very weak management from Rodgers.

Liverpool will be a better team when Gerrard leaves and Rodgers doesn't have to pander to him anymore.

think Rodgers may have gambled that we'd get a free in a good position

evo2000

Tis safe to say anyway pool and everton wont be challenging for top 4 this season, sturridge is being exposed without saurez to draw all the focus off him his not nearly as good.

The_Kew_Tour

evo2000 wrote: »

Tis safe to say anyway pool and everton wont be challenging for top 4 this season, sturridge is being exposed without saurez to draw all the focus off him his not nearly as good.

Liverpool are very much in the hunt for top 4.

Plenty of twists and turns to cone

If they get to a stage where they are 10+ points behind the top 4 teams then fair enough.

Kirby

evo2000 wrote: »

Tis safe to say anyway pool and everton wont be challenging for top 4 this season, sturridge is being exposed without saurez to draw all the focus off him his not nearly as good.

I agree Liverpool wont get top 4 but that comment about Sturridge is silly. Give him a chance to prove you right or wrong. Sure he's been crocked for most of the season.

SlickRic

evo2000 wrote: »

Tis safe to say anyway pool and everton wont be challenging for top 4 this season, sturridge is being exposed without saurez to draw all the focus off him his not nearly as good.

Being exposed?

You hurt my head. He's scored 2 in the about 200 league minutes he's played this season.

evo2000

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Liverpool are very much in the hunt for top 4.

Plenty of twists and turns to cone

If they get to a stage where they are 10+ points behind the top 4 teams then fair enough.

Liverpool havent the squad to handle all the games they have, the only reason they did so well last season was 1 because of saurez and 2 because they d no CL

Sturridge looked so good last season because most teams focused on shutting down saurez thus creating space for sturridge, liverpool are a very average team without suarez to be fair.

rossc007

evo2000 wrote: »

Liverpool havent the squad to handle all the games they have, the only reason they did so well last season was 1 because of saurez and 2 because they d no CL

Sturridge looked so good last season because most teams focused on shutting down saurez thus creating space for sturridge, liverpool are a very average team without suarez to be fair.

That post hurts my brain for lots and lots of reasons. Sturridge's goals per game is better without Suarez. The sample size is still pretty small, but it still illuminates your ignorance.

http://hereisthecity.com/en-gb/2014/07/11/ib-how-will-sturridge-perform-without-suarez-by-his-side-at-live/

Dirty Steve

Sturridge has played 80/85 minutes since he came back from a five month layoff. In that time he's scored one and Liverpool have won two and drawn one.
Bit early to be making wild assumptions.

evo2000

rossc007 wrote: »

That post hurts my brain for lots and lots of reasons. Sturridge's goals per game is better without Suarez. The sample size is still pretty small, but it still illuminates your ignorance.

http://hereisthecity.com/en-gb/2014/07/11/ib-how-will-sturridge-perform-without-suarez-by-his-side-at-live/

Terrible example, do you really think sturridge will be better without saurez? i doubt it.. highly!

Oranage2

evo2000 wrote: »

Terrible example, do you really think sturridge will be better without saurez? i doubt it.. highly!

Yes, Sturridge is most likely going to score more goals without Suarez, now that he's the main man.

The real question is: Will Liverpool be better with just Sturridge, going by this season it's a clear No.

Gavlor

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

I am struggling to think of one good defender, even one ok defender that Martinez has bought. He seems to lead a charmed existence in the PL despite that though.

You could say the very same about Rodgers.

Another observation, the sooner he leaves Gerrard out of the team the better from liverpools poor of view. He's an absolute passenger and a glory hunting one at that. They've looked much better without him.

rossc007

evo2000 wrote: »

Terrible example, do you really think sturridge will be better without saurez? i doubt it.. highly!

By terrible example are you reffering to reality? There really is no other type of "example". In reality, so far, Sturridge scores more when Suarez isn't playing.

Will I Amnt

rossc007 wrote: »

By terrible example are you reffering to reality? There really is no other type of "example". In reality, so far, Sturridge scores more when Suarez isn't playing.

Pointless stat really unless you start taking other factors into account.

rossc007

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Pointless stat really unless you start taking other factors into account.

So the argument he makes is that Sturridge only looks good when playing with Suarez. So I showed stats which illustrate that Sturridge scores more when Suarez isn't playing. Its the entire context of the discussion.

Did you just jump in the discussion and see something you disagreed with out of context?

Buford T. Justice XIX

Gavlor wrote: »

You could say the very same about Rodgers.

Another observation, the sooner he leaves Gerrard out of the team the better from liverpools poor of view. He's an absolute passenger and a glory hunting one at that. They've looked much better without him.

Rodgers has bought Sakho and Can.

While Sakho had a poor game yesterday, over the last two months he has been very, very good.

Can is also doing well, albeit played out of position but showing a good positional awareness with the added bonus of being able to carry the ball out of defense and disrupting opponents defensive balance.

I am not familiar enough with Swansea to say which players he has bought and have done well.

As for Gerrard, as someone said yesterday, he looks like he is running through treacle and his set-piece deliveries have been mostly poor lately. But if he leaves Gerrard out and Liverpool don't win, he has made a rod for his back for some supporters and if Gerrard is out and Liverpool win, those same supporters say it was nothing to do with Rodgers.

citytillidie

Oranage2 wrote: »

Yes, Sturridge is most likely going to score more goals without Suarez, now that he's the main man.

The real question is: Will Liverpool be better with just Sturridge, going by this season it's a clear No.

Well considering Sturridge has only played in 5 league games this season with Liverpools record being won 3 drew 1 and lost 1 when he has played I dunno how you can make that statement

Games he has played in
Southampton won
Man City lost
Spurs won
West ham won
Everton drew

Will I Amnt

rossc007 wrote: »

Did you just jump in the discussion and see something you disagreed with out of context?

I'm sorry, I'll wait for an invite next time...

Your point was that Sturridge scores more when Suarez isn't playing, I'm not getting at anything out of context.
What if it was 5 games that stat was based on and they were all against lower league opposition in cups? I know it wasn't but surely you can see what I'm referring to without whinging.

Do you have any awareness of how stupid that statement is on a public message board?

Oranage2

citytillidie wrote: »

Well considering Sturridge has only played in 5 league games this season with Liverpools record being won 3 drew 1 and lost 1 when he has played I dunno how you can make that statement

Games he has played in
Southampton won
Man City lost
Spurs won
West ham won
Everton drew

That's the problem though isn't it, Sturridge will always miss large chunks of the season through injury. I think he's a very good player, but imo he'll miss to many matches through injury to be relied on.

rossc007

Will I Amnt wrote: »

I'm sorry, I'll wait for an invite next time...

Your point was that Sturridge scores more when Suarez isn't playing, I'm not getting at anything out of context.
What if it was 5 games that stat was based on and they were all against lower league opposition in cups? I know it wasn't but surely you can see what I'm referring to without whinging.

Do you have any awareness of how stupid that statement is on a public message board?

Your post was so stupid that I was giving you the benefit the doubt. Looks like I over estimated you.

Its not 5 random games in isolation, its the only sample size available to measure the statement made. But I'll give you some rope, show me how sturridge is better when Suarez plays.

Will I Amnt

rossc007 wrote: »

show me how sturridge is better when Suarez plays.

First of all, I never said he was. All I said was that other factors need to be taken into account if you're going to use a few games where he didn't play with Suarez to support your point. Not sure why you're getting so defensive, a valid comment I would have thought.

8-10

Are we still talking about the Everton game here?

Will I Amnt

8-10 wrote: »

Are we still talking about the Everton game here?

Seems like the topic is Sturridge, who played in the Everton game.

rossc007

Will I Amnt wrote: »

First of all, I never said he was. All I said was that other factors need to be taken into account if you're going to use a few games where he didn't play with Suarez to support your point. Not sure why you're getting so defensive, a valid comment I would have thought.

This is obviously too confusing for you to keep up with. Someone, with an agenda, said Sturridge would be "exposed" without Suarez. I made the argument, using all the data available, Sturridges goal scoring record is better when Suarez didn't play. Then you rode in on your high horse with an imaginary arguement saying what if the stats came from 5 random games.

So if your argument is that the stats wouldn't prove anything if they where cherry picked then we are in agreement. But that was not the context of the discussion between myself and evo2000.

ricero

Jasus Everton are rotten. The smell of them yesterday what's happened they were a joy to watch last season

Buford T. Justice XIX

8-10 wrote: »

Are we still talking about the Everton game here?

Don't think so but who can know for sure?

8-10

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Don't think so but who can know for sure?

I'm just surprised there's still discussion, easily the worst derby I've seen in recent years.

Will I Amnt

rossc007 wrote: »

This is obviously too confusing for you to keep up with. Someone, with an agenda, said Sturridge would be "exposed" without Suarez. I made the argument, using all the data available, Sturridges goal scoring record is better when Suarez didn't play. Then you rode in on your high horse with an imaginary arguement saying what if the stats came from 5 random games.

So if your argument is that the stats wouldn't prove anything if they where cherry picked then we are in agreement. But that was not the context of the discussion between myself and evo2000.

Not confusing me at all, you're getting bogged down by semantics and frankly I think you're confusing yourself at this stage.

rossc007

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Not confusing me at all, you're getting bogged down by semantics and frankly I think you're confusing yourself at this stage.

Good come back, I thought it was impossible to win an argument on the internet, but that was until I came across you.

So to recap, you have nothing to add to the discussion other than some non-sensicle rubbish about 5 random games? I was even kind enough to summarize it for you in my last post.

Will I Amnt

rossc007 wrote: »

Good come back, I thought it was impossible to win an argument on the internet, but that was until I came across you.

So to recap, you have nothing to add to the discussion other than some non-sensicle rubbish about 5 random games? I was even kind enough to summarize it for you in my last post.

Semantics again, I'm sure anybody with a modicum of sense realises what I meant when I tried to simplify it down for you, I don't know the exact games that were played so I used an exaggerated example to show why the "games without Suarez" argument needs more than just numbers to justify using it.

I'm not going any further with this, you either don't want to understand or are incapable of understanding.

rossc007

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Semantics again, I'm sure anybody with a modicum of sense realises what I meant when I tried to simplify it down for you, I don't know the exact games that were played so I used an exaggerated example to show why the "games without Suarez" argument needs more than just numbers to justify using it.

I'm not going any further with this, you either don't want to understand or are incapable of understanding.

I can see why you tried to bow out early with your last post, your argument hasn't changed. The data is from ALL the games Sturridge played without Suarez. Thats the only data available. Who it was against would only matter if the games where cherry picked.

Soups123

Rodgers said Liverpool were outstanding yesterday and Stevie was terrific

He has to be the biggest bull****ter of all the current managers if I was a Pool man the guy would piss me of big time

Liverpool were good at best yesterday

Iused2likebusts

Will I Amnt wrote: »

First of all, I never said he was. All I said was that other factors need to be taken into account if you're going to use a few games where he didn't play with Suarez to support your point. Not sure why you're getting so defensive, a valid comment I would have thought.

By your logic surely you totally disagree with evos statement sturridge has played the equivalent of 4 games this year with Suarez gone. Strange you didn't feel the need to comment on that.

Iused2likebusts

Soups123 wrote: »

Rodgers said Liverpool were outstanding yesterday and Stevie was terrific

He has to be the biggest bull****ter of all the current managers if I was a Pool man the guy would piss me of big time

Liverpool were good at best yesterday

He is a spoofer I wouldn't pay any attention to what he says to the media.