Liverpool FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours 2016, Mod Warning in OP, 10/7

DrumSteve

Harry Palmr wrote: »

This is my favourite time of year - all promise, no disappointment!

Not if you follow LOI

NukaCola

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Time to switch off for the summer - I hate speculation / rumour / gossip / twitter ITK posts so god damn much.

Its almost the name of this superthread though :pac: but yea, summer really kills the thread......

Talisman

BullBlackNova wrote: »

There were some pretty staggering decisions made regarding recruitment in the last few seasons as you say.

For Gomez to play once or twice out of position in an emergency would have been acceptable, but the transfer window was still open - if Rodgers had so little faith in Moreno (and Smith), why wasn't something done about it then?

For me, the most puzzling move last summer was letting Markovic go with no replacement in place. Not that I rate Markovic that highly, but losing him and Sterling meant Ibe was the only pacy winger left. We signed a striker who thrives on crosses and wingers, and got rid of the f*cking wingers!!!

Brendan Rodgers - The guy that lost his brain/gonads when Sturridge got injured in August/September 2014. He invented some contrived vision of total football, wingers as lone strikers, wingers as fullbacks, enough central midfielders to bore the opposition to death. The 2014/15 game plan was to win games through moments of magic by individual players.

Sterling decided not to hang about and those that had failed the manager (his backroom staff, Rickie Lambert, Mario Balotelli, Lazar Markovic) were shipped out. Wingers had failed the manager.

Gomez was given a chance to play in the first team during pre-season at left back and the manager like his performances so much he decided he should start the season in the position. Was it simply a crazy idea or is Rodgers a visionary?

Simply put, Daniel Sturridge cost Brendan Rodgers his job and possibly his brain/gonads.

NukaCola

Talisman wrote: »

Simply put, Daniel Sturridge cost Brendan Rodgers his job and possibly his brain/gonads.

Brendan Rodgers completely turning his back on super fast attacking football and returning to his Swansea possession based wankery cost him his job.

Danny's injury and Suarez leaving made it harder to do, but bringing in players like Balotelli/Lambert/Benteke as attackers indicates to me he was moving away from what made us dangerous to a more possession based easy to play against tactic.

He may never have been able to recreate the attacking tactic without Danny and Suarez.

BullBlackNova

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/liverpool-misfit-christian-benteke-wants-8007145

Some interesting lines here from Benteke about wanting to adapt to Klopp's style of play and make a better go of things next season.

Yet the 25-year-old insists Liverpool knew what his game was all about when they signed him from Aston Villa under Brendan Rodgers last summer and argues that he has scored some important goals for Klopp, netting four match-winners despite his limited opportunities.

Benteke, who played only the final eight minutes in Basel, said: “I think Liverpool bought me with my strengths and weaknesses – of course I have to adapt to the manager but now the season is over and we want to try to speak with him and to try and find a solution for next season.

“Losing the final is going to be a big disappointment for us, because now next season we are just going to play the Premier League [and domestic Cups] and we have a big, big squad.

"So we play just one game a week and it's going to be tough, so maybe the manager is going to make some choices.

“Of course there is going to be big change because Liverpool is a massive club and we cannot stay more than one year without Europe.

“I want to see the manager's plan for next season. I am not the only one who is going to do that. I think a lot of players want to know what is going to happen. I signed for five years, I didn't sign for one year. But now I have to speak with the manager and see his plan.

“I think it wasn't my best season, but when I had my chance I scored important goals, I didn't score goals in, like, 4-0s and 5-0s.

“It's not that I am happy with that. I knew I could give more for the team but now the season is over I have to look forward and see what's going to happen next season.”

It's funnny - the Sky version of this article leaves out any sense of Benteke saying he can do better and wants to try. Just goes with "Benteke demands Klopp showdown" and talks about Sky sources linking him to West Ham.

PaddyWilliams

BullBlackNova wrote: »

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/liverpool-misfit-christian-benteke-wants-8007145

Some interesting lines here from Benteke about wanting to adapt to Klopp's style of play and make a better go of things next season.



It's funnny - the Sky version of this article leaves out any sense of Benteke saying he can do better and wants to try. Just goes with "Benteke demands Klopp showdown" and talks about Sky sources linking him to West Ham.

Jaysus, not like Sky to sensationalise things!

garra

Benzino wrote: »

If we are after 2 lb's, I wonder what will happen to Gomez? By all accounts, he was our first choice lb under Rodgers. Was very impressed with him.

I reckon we might have won that final if Gomez had been available, such a shame for him and the club that he was cut down so early in the season.

Harry Palmr

I'm glad Benteke noticed that his games were typically Liverpool's lowest scoring! I don't think his pleading will make any difference though.

Firmino goals and assists for the season, he gets some stick but dammit looks at this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIyTGek2WA4

rob316

Benteke wasn't a spectacular flop he scored 1 in 3 in the premier league, he's still a high value asset and a very good player. Its just he will never fit in at this this club, from the academy up players are explicity told to keep the ball on the ground.

I myself hoped he would adapt better to our style of play, because he isn't slow, has a good first touch and can finish pretty well.

I feel sorry for him though, he was bought by a manager who had no idea how to use him. If you built a team around his strengths he'd be quite prolific.

Maybe if Klopp changed his approach next season and played with wingers as opposed to overloading the middle of the pitch with 2nd strikers/AM/ Number 10's he would have a future.

When we will see the even more ridiculous fees been bandied about for PL proven talent this summer, asking for £30m for him will look a bargain.

Irishmale0399

Lads dont forget.....at Dortmund it took Auba and Lewa both more than one season to adapt to Klopps style of play. Look at them today, both sat on the bench a lot in their first season and look out of their dept. If Klopp sees a chance he will keep him. Guess it all depends on how his budget is and how much control he has on how it can be spent.

BullBlackNova

Harry Palmr wrote: »

I'm glad Benteke noticed that his games were typically Liverpool's lowest scoring! I don't think his pleading will make any difference though.

Probably not but, to be fair to him, his goals were vital at times this season.

He scored our only goal in games against Bournemouth (1-0), Leicester (1-0), Southampton (1-1), Sunderland (1-0) and Chelsea (1-1), as well as the winner against Palace in the 2-1. That's an additional 10 points directly contributed from his goals.

He clearly doesn't fit and, in all likelihood, shouldn't have been signed in the first place, but I do have a little bit of sympathy for him.

ricero

Any rumors floating about in regards to how much klopp has to spend in the transfer market ?

rob316

ricero wrote: »

Any rumors floating about in regards to how much klopp has to spend in the transfer market ?

I don't think we will spending much (net wise) to be honest with Benteke, Lucas, Skrtel and Allen likely to leave. Surely that will generate 40-50m. Gotze will probably be the biggest outlay if we can pull it off and even that is reported at just £20m.

I don't see the need to spend £100m again.

Nerdlingr

BullBlackNova wrote: »

Probably not but, to be fair to him, his goals were vital at times this season.

He scored our only goal in games against Bournemouth (1-0), Leicester (1-0), Southampton (1-1), Sunderland (1-0) and Chelsea (1-1), as well as the winner against Palace in the 2-1. That's an additional 10 points directly contributed from his goals.

He clearly doesn't fit and, in all likelihood, shouldn't have been signed in the first place, but I do have a little bit of sympathy for him.

He only started two out of those six games as well. So with what little game time he has been given he's tried his best. I feel sorry for Benteke. I think he could be an excellent striker in the right team. He a one goal in two man, given the right service. He's been lambasted all season for not being in the box but more often than not he's had to come short to receive the ball, rather than wait around for our non existent wingers to whip in crosses.

Harry Palmr

ricero wrote: »

Any rumors floating about in regards to how much klopp has to spend in the transfer market ?

Interestingly there has been no real mention of transfer busgets for this summer. Usually there is some guff about how LFC will have 40 million plus sales or some such but not this time. That may mean nothing of course and Klopp has a budget obviously but I don't see him breaking any records to sign the players he wants. Goetze/Gotze will surely be the most expensive target all summer.

8-10

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

Lads dont forget.....at Dortmund it took Auba and Lewa both more than one season to adapt to Klopps style of play. Look at them today, both sat on the bench a lot in their first season and look out of their dept. If Klopp sees a chance he will keep him. Guess it all depends on how his budget is and how much control he has on how it can be spent.

Lewandowski is the player that Benteke has to strive to be in order to fit in to Klopp's system. I know that might sound outrageous, but it's the only way he'd have a future.

He has the talent and ability to be able to score from anywhere. Mentally and Physically there are gaps though. Mentally you have to be ruthlessly greedy and physically he has to be more mobile and quicker in pulling away from defenders rather than backing into them. Then, importantly, the rest of the team have to treat him like a mobile striker and not a guy to lump it up to. If the team play like they are currently with him on the field, it doesn't matter how much he tries to adapt he'll still be the tall back-to-goal striker giving knock-downs.

I don't think he'll stay. I don't think he'll get to Lewandowski's level. However, I actually think he has the ability to be that type of striker if he works at it enough and convinces everybody. He's had a rough time but he's an excellent striker in the right system, and his attitude has been very good for somebody hung out to dry for the whole season.

Take the transfer fee away and imagine he came for £5m last summer, a lot of us would be sitting here now and saying we might as well give him another year. It's because he was over £30m that gets us criticizing. And if you think about it - that's completely ridiculous. Fans care far far far too much about transfer fees. It's so ludicrous that we even talk about it because none of us know how much is in the pot to spend and nobody adds in contract values so it's already a skewed view of a transfer value.

Taking all our players on their merits, Benteke is good enough to be in our squad and young enough to adapt to a new way of playing if he applies himself enough and Klopp wants him in the system.

It's Klopp's call and I trust that he knows what he's doing when he makes the decision on keeping him or selling him

BullBlackNova

rob316 wrote: »

I don't think we will spending much (net wise) to be honest with Benteke, Lucas, Skrtel and Allen likely to leave. Surely that will generate 40-50m. Gotze will probably be the biggest outlay if we can pull it off and even that is reported at just £20m.

I don't see the need to spend £100m again.

Doubt we'd get near that in sales. Benteke would be £20m ish if rumours are to be believed. Allen is out of contract so thats nothing, none of our youth/fringe players will turn around too much and I wouldn't expect Lucas and Skrtel to fetch more than 10m combined given their age and squad status. Even adding in Balotelli, we're probably still on the wrong side of 40m - these are huge earners and that will be the main thing for the club, getting those wages off the books. I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised if some of them were let go for practically nothing just to get rid.

Agree that there's no need for another 100m, though, especially if Karius (4.7m), Matip (free) and Grujic (5.1m) are the main arrivals in each of those positions. Adding in a LB (or two - Hector and Chilwell) and Gotze, to take the most frequently mentioned players we're linked with, and we're still not spending a huge amount.

Nerdlingr wrote: »

He only started two out of those six games as well. So with what little game time he has been given he's tried his best. I feel sorry for Benteke. I think he could be an excellent striker in the right team. He a one goal in two man, given the right service. He's been lambasted all season for not being in the box but more often than not he's had to come short to receive the ball, rather than wait around for our non existent wingers to whip in crosses.

Exactly this really. Signing Benteke made absolutely no sense after Markovic and Sterling moved on. It's frustrating and will be even more so when he gets 20 next season at West Ham or Southampton or whoever he joins.

rob316

Wee Joe has 12 months left, easily fetch £10m

5starpool

Every season people expect Lucas to be sold, every season he is not. I don't think it'll be any different this season.

klose

5starpool wrote: »

Every season people expect Lucas to be sold, every season he is not. I don't think it'll be any different this season.

The fact that he now seems to be a compitent centre back also adds more reason to him staying about. The more I think about it allen will almost certainly leave with grujic coming in and more than likely zielinski.

Knex*

Kevin Volland off to Leverkusen, so that's one player we would have been inevitably linked with already gone. Great signing for them, actually.

citytillidie

Old stand almost all gone

MD1990

Really looking forward to see how Origi develops. I think he can be a fantastic striker/forward for us.

dogbert27

MD1990 wrote: »

Really looking forward to see how Origi develops. I think he can be a fantastic striker/forward for us.

I think he will be the one Klopp tries to develop in to a Lewandowski type striker.


I'd like to keep Benteke for another season provided he'd be happy to be used as he is and not start complaining half way through the season.

marklazarcovic

Was at klopps first homegame,sitting in kop, said it afterwards that oirigi was hopless,absolutley lost he was.. the change has been fantastic

MD1990

marklazarcovic wrote: »

Was at klopps first homegame,sitting in kop, said it afterwards that oirigi was hopless,absolutley lost he was.. the change has been fantastic

I thought he played well in Klopp's 1st game tbh. Up front with little support.

Chesty08

MD1990 wrote: »

Really looking forward to see how Origi develops. I think he can be a fantastic striker/forward for us.

Don't think he will be any use tbh. Bar his speed he hasn't shown anything. He is terrible on the ball & never beats a man

PaddyWilliams

Chesty08 wrote: »

Don't think he will be any use tbh. Bar his speed he hasn't shown anything. He is terrible on the ball & never beats a man

Never beats a man? I recall a few instances where he has beaten men. He is deceptively quick, IMO.

Sappy404

Chesty08 wrote: »

Don't think he will be any use tbh. Bar his speed he hasn't shown anything. He is terrible on the ball & never beats a man

Quick, great feet, intelligent, built like a tank... what's not to like?

bur

Chesty08 wrote: »

Don't think he will be any use tbh. Bar his speed he hasn't shown anything. He is terrible on the ball & never beats a man

kevohmsford

I don't think Benteke will be able to adapt to the forward that Klopp needs. Sturridge, Origi, Ings and a new striker next season.

Utopia Parkway

kevohmsford wrote: »

I don't think Benteke will be able to adapt to the forward that Klopp needs. Sturridge, Origi, Ings and a new striker next season.

Have my doubts that we'll buy another striker. Even if Benteke is sold we have Sturridge, Origi, Ings and Firmino can fill in up there as well. Plus less games next season with no European football. The big question mark of course is can Sturridge stay healthy.

Lord Trollington

Only coming to terms with Wednesday night now and being able to write about it. I feel I need to mention it as a way of therapy so I can move on. To say I was gutted is an understatement.

Up there with massive sporting disappointments in the past, all of which I was at in person. Kildare losing the All Ireland Final in 1998, Ireland losing to spain on penalties in 2002 World Cup in Japan, Kildare losing to Down hitting the corssbar in the last kick of the game to reach All Ireland Final in 2010 and bottling the league in 2013 against Chelsea and Palace. I can now add LFC v Seville to the list of sporting events that left me devastated. I sometimes think I jinxed, supporting Liverpool and being from Kildare. Both have been nearly there for the last 20 years, but never quite there.

Maybe it's because it was Klopp and what he done to get us there made me feel like it was meant to be. But in sport nothing is meant to be. You've to earn it. When you don't, the defeats can results in massively disappointing lows but these are dwarfed by the unbelievable highs in winning. And I'm certain with Klopp at the helm there will be massive highs ahead.

A massive summers transfer window ahead, our biggest ever. What an exciting couple of months it could be before August.

PS: A massive fan of Rodger, would love to see him get the Celtic job with Rangers back in the league.

xabi

citytillidie wrote: »

Old stand almost all gone

Looks like the pitch has been re-positioned, lots of room to its left and between it and the old stand.

Harry Palmr

Only If Liverpool are planning on playing 5 a side next season!

xabi

On closer inspection I can see that they have taken up a good bit

Boom_Bap

We generally play into the Kop in the second half. We've taken away the left back position on the pitch so Moreno can't make a c0ck of things in the second half of each home game next season.

5starpool

xabi wrote: »

Looks like the pitch has been re-positioned, lots of room to its left and between it and the old stand.

Was this a serious comment?

Harry Palmr

Boom_Bap wrote: »

We generally play into the Kop in the second half. We've taken away the left back position on the pitch so Moreno can't make a c0ck of things in the second half of each home game next season.

I think that shot above is the consequence of the crowds reaction to one of Moreno's brain farts! :pac:

jasonb

Lord Trollington wrote: »

and bottling the league in 2013 against Chelsea and Palace.

I hope this doesn't turn into a massive sprawling argument, and I don't want to bring up bad memories, but do us LFC fans feel like we 'bottled' the league in '14? I know most non-LFC fans think we did, but what about us?

Personally, I don't think we 'bottled it', and I've never really understood that take on the season, apart from non-LFC fans of course!

To win the league, we needed to win 13 and draw 1 of our last 14 games. We won 12, drew 1 and lost 1. We don't seem to get credit for winning 11 in a row in the first place (or for only losing 1 league game from Jan to May) to give ourselves a chance of winning the league; instead it's said that we bottled it 'cos we lost to Chelsea. If I recall correctly, Chelsea themselves still could have won the league after they beat us, but they then drew 0-0 at home to Norwich. Yet they didn't bottle it, and we did?

To me, Newcastle losing a 12 point lead back in the 90s is more in line with the concept of 'bottling it'. Yes, we panicked in the Palace game and threw away 2 points by losing a 3 goal lead, but that was after we knew the damage was done in the Chelsea game, and even if we'd beaten Palace we still had to hope City would make a mistake, and they didn't.

Don't get me wrong, it was heart-breaking for me that we didn't win it, and I still find myself thinking 'if only we'd got an equaliser against Chelsea' etc. etc., but I really don't think we threw it away. We gave ourselves a great, unexpected, chance to win it all, and came up just short.

So is this 'bottling' thing just media spin/other fans opinions? They ridicule Gerrard's post City speech in the huddle on the pitch, but the point of what he was saying (basically 'we go again' - this win means nothing if we don't win the next game) seems to have been lost, and now he's slagged for thinking we had it won?

What does everyone think?

J.

dogbert27

jasonb wrote: »

Lord Trollington wrote: »

and bottling the league in 2013 against Chelsea and Palace.

I hope this doesn't turn into a massive sprawling argument, and I don't want to bring up bad memories, but do us LFC fans feel like we 'bottled' the league in '14? I know most non-LFC fans think we did, but what about us?

Personally, I don't think we 'bottled it', and I've never really understood that take on the season, apart from non-LFC fans of course!

To win the league, we needed to win 13 and draw 1 of our last 14 games. We won 12, drew 1 and lost 1. We don't seem to get credit for winning 11 in a row in the first place (or for only losing 1 league game from Jan to May) to give ourselves a chance of winning the league; instead it's said that we bottled it 'cos we lost to Chelsea. If I recall correctly, Chelsea themselves still could have won the league after they beat us, but they then drew 0-0 at home to Norwich. Yet they didn't bottle it, and we did?

To me, Newcastle losing a 12 point lead back in the 90s is more in line with the concept of 'bottling it'. Yes, we panicked in the Palace game and threw away 2 points by losing a 3 goal lead, but that was after we knew the damage was done in the Chelsea game, and even if we'd beaten Palace we still had to hope City would make a mistake, and they didn't.

Don't get me wrong, it was heart-breaking for me that we didn't win it, and I still find myself thinking 'if only we'd got an equaliser against Chelsea' etc. etc., but I really don't think we threw it away. We gave ourselves a great, unexpected, chance to win it all, and came up just short.

So is this 'bottling' thing just media spin/other fans opinions? They ridicule Gerrard's post City speech in the huddle on the pitch, but the point of what he was saying (basically 'we go again' - this win means nothing if we don't win the next game) seems to have been lost, and now he's slagged for thinking we had it won?

What does everyone think?

J.

We didn't bottle it but the wrong tactics were used against Chelsea. We could afford one drawn game from the last three and that should have been the Chelsea game.

Instead we ran out all guns blazing playing in to Mourinho's hands as he successfully frustrated the Liverpool players with time wasting tactics in the first half!

Still remember Gerrard frantically trying to get the ball from Mourinho for a throw in at 0-0.

Why??!!

8-10

jasonb wrote: »

I hope this doesn't turn into a massive sprawling argument, and I don't want to bring up bad memories, but do us LFC fans feel like we 'bottled' the league in '14? I know most non-LFC fans think we did, but what about us?

Personally, I don't think we 'bottled it', and I've never really understood that take on the season, apart from non-LFC fans of course!

To win the league, we needed to win 13 and draw 1 of our last 14 games. We won 12, drew 1 and lost 1. We don't seem to get credit for winning 11 in a row in the first place (or for only losing 1 league game from Jan to May) to give ourselves a chance of winning the league; instead it's said that we bottled it 'cos we lost to Chelsea. If I recall correctly, Chelsea themselves still could have won the league after they beat us, but they then drew 0-0 at home to Norwich. Yet they didn't bottle it, and we did?

To me, Newcastle losing a 12 point lead back in the 90s is more in line with the concept of 'bottling it'. Yes, we panicked in the Palace game and threw away 2 points by losing a 3 goal lead, but that was after we knew the damage was done in the Chelsea game, and even if we'd beaten Palace we still had to hope City would make a mistake, and they didn't.

Don't get me wrong, it was heart-breaking for me that we didn't win it, and I still find myself thinking 'if only we'd got an equaliser against Chelsea' etc. etc., but I really don't think we threw it away. We gave ourselves a great, unexpected, chance to win it all, and came up just short.

So is this 'bottling' thing just media spin/other fans opinions? They ridicule Gerrard's post City speech in the huddle on the pitch, but the point of what he was saying (basically 'we go again' - this win means nothing if we don't win the next game) seems to have been lost, and now he's slagged for thinking we had it won?

What does everyone think?

J.

Arsenal were top of the table for 128 days in 2013/14, that's half the season. And they ended up 4th.

Of course the Arsenal fans will tell you that we bottled it.

galwaylad14

jasonb wrote: »

I hope this doesn't turn into a massive sprawling argument, and I don't want to bring up bad memories, but do us LFC fans feel like we 'bottled' the league in '14? I know most non-LFC fans think we did, but what about us?

Personally, I don't think we 'bottled it', and I've never really understood that take on the season, apart from non-LFC fans of course!

To win the league, we needed to win 13 and draw 1 of our last 14 games. We won 12, drew 1 and lost 1. We don't seem to get credit for winning 11 in a row in the first place (or for only losing 1 league game from Jan to May) to give ourselves a chance of winning the league; instead it's said that we bottled it 'cos we lost to Chelsea. If I recall correctly, Chelsea themselves still could have won the league after they beat us, but they then drew 0-0 at home to Norwich. Yet they didn't bottle it, and we did?

To me, Newcastle losing a 12 point lead back in the 90s is more in line with the concept of 'bottling it'. Yes, we panicked in the Palace game and threw away 2 points by losing a 3 goal lead, but that was after we knew the damage was done in the Chelsea game, and even if we'd beaten Palace we still had to hope City would make a mistake, and they didn't.

Don't get me wrong, it was heart-breaking for me that we didn't win it, and I still find myself thinking 'if only we'd got an equaliser against Chelsea' etc. etc., but I really don't think we threw it away. We gave ourselves a great, unexpected, chance to win it all, and came up just short.

So is this 'bottling' thing just media spin/other fans opinions? They ridicule Gerrard's post City speech in the huddle on the pitch, but the point of what he was saying (basically 'we go again' - this win means nothing if we don't win the next game) seems to have been lost, and now he's slagged for thinking we had it won?

What does everyone think?

J.

Ya but you're looking at it from the viewpoint of when there was 14 games left, now I don't know where Liverpool were at that stage in the league but I'm going to guess that the title wasn't really on at that stage? But they go on a miraculous run and manage to put themselves in pole position to win.

You mention how it would have taken 13 wins and a draw from the last 14 games or whatever, but remember they did manage to win that first 11 games. That part was accomplished. It was done and the points were in the bag.

So they were in the position that they had won 11 games in a row, 7 more points needed to win the title. Next up is a 2nd string (and that's being generous to a few of the geniuses that played that day) Chelsea team at home, Palace away and I can't remember who the last game was but I think it was a relatively straightforward one at home?

The bookies made Liverpool 1/7 favourites at this stage. 1/7 is probably about what they'd be to beat a Championship team at home. They couldn't do it. That's a bottle job.

Of course if you look at it from the point of view of when there was 14 games left and there was little chance of winning it then it's not a bottle job, but that ignores the fact that with 3 games to go they were 1/7 favourites and failed to win it. Bottled.

Your argument is the equivalent of saying that because no one expected Leicester to win the league with 38 games left that had they given it away when they went 7 points clear there a few weeks ago that it wouldn't have been seen as them bottling it. Of course it would have.

Nerdlingr

last game was newcastle at home.

fyfe79

Pool fans will always be slagged off, even when the slag is unrealistic. The league was certainly not 'bottled' (always hated that term anyway). "Bottling" suggests fear was rampant during the Chelsea game. It wasn't. Liverpool were on the front front - wrong tactics as someone already stated - and an honest slip changed the game. Against Palace again there was no fear - took a 3-0 lead and naively thought they could make it another 9-0 and win the league on goal difference. It left the defence wide open.

If anything, the team "bottled it" (urgh) the other night in the 2nd half. The refereeing mistakes cost them a (likely) 3-0 lead in the 1st half which would've killed the game, but there was still no excuse for the performance in the 2nd half. Once the equalizer went in, heads went down.

fyfe79

galwaylad14 wrote: »

Of course if you look at it from the point of view of when there was 14 games left and there was little chance of winning it then it's not a bottle job, but that ignores the fact that with 3 games to go they were 1/7 favourites and failed to win it. Bottled.

Disagree. Odds are dictated by sheer amounts of bets on either side, bookies will always cover themselves as it was obvious a lot of money was going down on Liverpool. The fact is they were playing a Chelsea side (managed by Mourinho) who still had a chance of winning the league themselves. That's not the equivalent of a championship side. The league was lost that day.

Turtyturd

jasonb wrote: »

I hope this doesn't turn into a massive sprawling argument, and I don't want to bring up bad memories, but do us LFC fans feel like we 'bottled' the league in '14? I know most non-LFC fans think we did, but what about us?

Personally, I don't think we 'bottled it', and I've never really understood that take on the season, apart from non-LFC fans of course!

To win the league, we needed to win 13 and draw 1 of our last 14 games. We won 12, drew 1 and lost 1. We don't seem to get credit for winning 11 in a row in the first place (or for only losing 1 league game from Jan to May) to give ourselves a chance of winning the league; instead it's said that we bottled it 'cos we lost to Chelsea. If I recall correctly, Chelsea themselves still could have won the league after they beat us, but they then drew 0-0 at home to Norwich. Yet they didn't bottle it, and we did?

To me, Newcastle losing a 12 point lead back in the 90s is more in line with the concept of 'bottling it'. Yes, we panicked in the Palace game and threw away 2 points by losing a 3 goal lead, but that was after we knew the damage was done in the Chelsea game, and even if we'd beaten Palace we still had to hope City would make a mistake, and they didn't.

Don't get me wrong, it was heart-breaking for me that we didn't win it, and I still find myself thinking 'if only we'd got an equaliser against Chelsea' etc. etc., but I really don't think we threw it away. We gave ourselves a great, unexpected, chance to win it all, and came up just short.

So is this 'bottling' thing just media spin/other fans opinions? They ridicule Gerrard's post City speech in the huddle on the pitch, but the point of what he was saying (basically 'we go again' - this win means nothing if we don't win the next game) seems to have been lost, and now he's slagged for thinking we had it won?

What does everyone think?

J.

Have never seen it anywhere other than here. The SF is a pro United space with the majority of posters being United fans so when they repeat little nuggets of rubbish unfortunately some other people will get caught up and believe them. See Smalling being the best defender in the league, De Gea being the best keeper in the world, Martial being better than Origi for other examples.

marklazarcovic

MD1990 wrote:

I thought he played well in Klopp's 1st game tbh. Up front with little support.

Up front like a scared cat,discontent from the fans all game towards him... Sakho tho..he got plenty of love

5starpool

1/7 (or anything like that) was ridiculous odds, and just everyone involved getting carried away. We lost the league against Chelsea that day, the Palace game was embarrassing, but not vital.

gafferino

xabi wrote: »

Looks like the pitch has been re-positioned, lots of room to its left and between it and the old stand.

They are making the left side smaller so Moreno doesnt get caught out of position as much. :cool: