Were Liverpool lucky to win the CL?

PHB

I've been having this over with a couple of mates now and I was wondering on the general consensus now that the dust has settled.

I personally think they were lucky to win it.
I dont think that detracts from them at all, United were lucky to win it in 99, matches against Juve and Bayern we got quite a bit of luck.

Guy:Incognito

Not at all. Luck wins matches, not competitions. Luck can only be considered luck for so long, it has to become intetional at some stage.

_blank_

No

I voted yes, but I agree with the point that Stekelly just made.

They played their best football in the CL no doubt, and did well to get to the final.

At 3-0 down at half time, yes, I would say they were lucky to win.

The Milan side they faced played out their entire season in that one game. Started off really well, looked to be coasting, then imploded.

Thanx 4 The Fish

Liverpool were undefeated in every game of the knockout stages. Luck just does not cover that, good tactics by Rafa (albeit spoiling in some cases) with a large dose of heart and commitment.

Jivin Turkey

PHB wrote:

I personally think they were lucky to win it.

What makes you think they were lucky?

Bar the "goal" against Chelsea I cant remember one contentious decision going in their favour. And even at that it could be argued that a penalty and a red card could have been more favourable than a goal.

I do recall a couple of clear-cut penalties turned down in Leverkusen, and a blatant handball which led to the only goal in Monaco.

When they adopted their spoiling tactics they were rarely under the cosh, and most teams only got a couple of half chances against them.

The final aside they didnt conceed more than one goal in any game, keeping clean sheets in seven. They also scored a lot of goals, I dont know the exact stats but Id imagine they were in the top three in goals scored in the competition. Nobody scored more goals in the knockout stages.

/edit for it to be a more realistic indication of the actual results you probably should have put in a choice of "Yes (Manchester United fan)"

Dublin's Finest

Yes(Liverpool fans)

There's luck in everything, but to come back from 3 down and then go on to win is hardly lucky. They deserved their win. They wanted the win badly and it showed in the end.

As a Man U fan, it hurts saying that....

PHB

No

The following incidents I feel were lucky:

vs. Juve:

Cannavaro's header against the post, then off Dudek, then frantically cleared off the line by Traore

vs. Chelsea:

Duff + Robben injured
The goal given when it wasn't, although i'm sure it woulda been a peno, although no whistle was blown
Godjohnsons miss at the end

vs. AC Milan:

Smicer's goal, i.e. Dida's shoddy handling
Gerrards peno
Dudek's save against Shev towards the end

And of course, the ultimate in chance, a penalty shootout

Jivin Turkey

PHB wrote:

vs. Juve:

Cannavaro's header against the post, then off Dudek, then frantically cleared off the line by Traore

So because Juve missed a good chance in a single game, it means them winning the whole competition was lucky? Juve created very little over two legs and were deservedly beaten.

To single one bad miss is ridiculous. Baros got put clean through in Turin and bottled it, would this not offset said miss?

PHB wrote:

vs. Chelsea:

Duff + Robben injured
The goal given when it wasn't, although i'm sure it woulda been a peno, although no whistle was blown
Godjohnsons miss at the end

Duff and Robben injured? Would that not have been offset by Liverpools numerous injuries and cup-tied players?

As I said the goal may have been given but it could be argued that Chelsea were lucky their. The ref said after the game that if it wasnt a goal he would have sent the keeper off.

Again because Gudjohnsen missed a chance at the end Liverpool were lucky? I remember Cech pulling off a great save in the first leg from a Baros header.

PHB wrote:

vs. AC Milan:

Smicer's goal, i.e. Dida's shoddy handling
Gerrards peno
Dudek's save against Shev towards the end

And of course, the ultimate in chance, a penalty shootout

Smicers goal? See Leverkusen's or Juve's goals.

Gerrards peno? I thought it was a peno. Liverpool were denied a number of clear penos in Leverkusen.

Peno's are obviously luck to some degree, but if you take peno's as confidently as Liverpools players did I would expect to win.

You are also forgetting the earlier rounds where Liverpool didnt have a lot of luck. Saviolas goal for Monaco was a farce.

PiE

No they weren't lucky. Liverpool won, get over it.

Drag00n79

Love the way that our crowning as Champions of Europe is clearly sticking in so many throats. I especially enjoy re-reading the first half posts from the CL Final. That humours me no end.

PHB

No

Jivin Turkey wrote:

Juve created very little over two legs and were deservedly beaten.

I agree, doesn't change the fact they were very lucky in that moment.

Duff and Robben injured? Would that not have been offset by Liverpools numerous injuries and cup-tied players?

Comparable injuries to Liverpool would be Gerrard and Garcia both out of the match

Again because Gudjohnsen missed a chance at the end Liverpool were lucky? I remember Cech pulling off a great save in the first leg from a Baros header.

They were lucky because any other day he would have hammered it home.

Smicers goal? See Leverkusen's or Juve's goals.

Indeed

Gerrards peno? I thought it was a peno. Liverpool were denied a number of clear penos in Leverkusen.

Ok, but when you slaughter teams you tend not to get the penos. I didn't think it was a peno at all tbh.

Peno's are obviously luck to some degree, but if you take peno's as confidently as Liverpools players did I would expect to win.

To an extent, the same 5 kickers, I think with one difference, won the CL final against Juve.
Penos come down to a lot of luck

---

You act is if luck is a bad thing.
Liverpool had luck surrounding their team this year in the CL, which is down to something that Benetiz has done that is undefinable.

Guy:Incognito

PHB wrote:

To an extent, the same 5 kickers, I think with one difference, won the CL final against Juve.
Penos come down to a lot of luck.

Milans penalties were missed because of lack of confidence. Not one of the takers looked like they were going to score. They were all ****ting themselves. By contrast Liverpools players were the exact opposite. Dudek was great. The Milan players didnt know what to do when he was standing in front of them handing them the ball.

smemon

No

yes. a side that hasnt won their domestic league in 15 years? (im losing track), has only qualified for the champions league a handful of times during that period & a side that was mainly put together by gerrard houllier has to be lucky to win a champions league.

i think we'll see if liverpool were lucky to win it next season once the expectation is on them and they are expected to win. a great side can retain trophies, any side can win them with a bit of luck.

its not down to luck however if you retain a trophy. i'll be the first man to praise and congratulate liverpool if they retain the CL if liverpool weren't lucky as liverpool fans suggest, they should have a good chance at winning it next year too.

Guy:Incognito

smemon wrote:

yes. a side that hasnt won their domestic league in 15 years? (im losing track), has only qualified for the champions league a handful of times during that period & a side that was mainly put together by gerrard houllier has to be lucky to win a champions league.

i think we'll see if liverpool were lucky to win it next season once the expectation is on them and they are expected to win. a great side can retain trophies, any side can win them with a bit of luck.

its not down to luck however if you retain a trophy. i'll be the first man to praise and congratulate liverpool if they retain the CL if liverpool weren't lucky as liverpool fans suggest, they should have a good chance at winning it next year too.

considering that the last team to retain it were Milan in 1989 and 90 does that mean there has been no great teams since and the winners have been lucky each yeah. Or is it just Liverpool because they are liverpool,

Plus, up to a few years ago only the league winners qualified so it would have been hard for Liverpool to be in it seeing as they havnt won the league in 15 as you point out.

Oh and by the way, in the time since Liverpool won the League they have won the same amount of European cups as all the league winners combined, they're not doing to bad. (this stretches back to the inception of the European cp if you want to go that far)

quarryman

No

interesting that every single liverpool fan so far has voted no.

mr_angry

Yes(Liverpool fans)

I think if you look at it from the opposite perspective, its enlightening. Who was unlucky not to win it? Nobody. Did any of the other teams deserve to win it? No. Therefore Liverpool were the most deserving team in the competition. Justice done IMO.

DamoRed

* * * * * LIVERPOOL - 5 TIMES EUROPEAN CHAMPIONS * * * * *



Read it as many times as you like, bitters, it's not going to change!


The dust may have settled for you, but the fact is, the most prized possession in European football is in the trphy room at Anfield. And it's staying there!


The heart, commitment, belief, and effort put in by Liverpool's players in all matches was an example to all. Every match involves incidents that could change a match either way. A save, a miss, in chelski's case, a number of deflected goals, anything you can think of. If they're what you call lucky, well they go both ways.

All of these incidents have already been discussed. What I have to laugh at is the 4 options in a poll that's simply a yes or no answer. The inclusion of two further optiions for Liverpool fans are an affront to decency. I can just hear those bitters saying that all the 'no' verdicts from the Liverpool fans 'don't count anyway, because they're Liverpool fans' It's laughable really

Well I've news for you guys, NONE of them matter. It's only a poll. With that in mind, I'm not voting in this tin pot poll. And I refer you once again to my opening sentence!

What's that? You want me to say it again? Oh......ok then, mighty generous and gracious of you!

* * * * * LIVERPOOL - 5 TIMES EUROPEAN CHAMPIONS * * * * *



Damo

ianomccabe

Yes(Liverpool fans)

Do people really expect a team to win a tournament someday without

• Conceding a chance to any team along the way
• Having a spell of pressure come against them which they weather
• Be involved in debatable refereeing decisions

Of course every team that wins any tournament be it under 8's in the local park or Liverpool winning the champions league will inevitably experience the three things i have listed. Doesn't mean that the team is lucky to win it

Thanx 4 The Fish

smemon wrote:

yes. a side that hasnt won their domestic league in 15 years? (im losing track)

But surely you can count to 25 lad. Luck is one thing, remaining undefeated for the whole of the knockout stages is not about luck. Two goals in the last couple of minutes of a final, now that's luck.

Pepe LeFrits

No

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote:

Two goals in the last couple of minutes of a final, now that's luck.

lol, so what was Gerrard's goal against the Greeks then? And what difference does it make when they happened? They scored the goals fair and square, it's not like they were dodgy penalties or dubious ball-over-line decisions.

Liverpool were lucky to win the CL, but most teams that have won the CL have needed a bit of luck, it's a cup competition after all. Fair play to Liverpool. I'm surprised none of their fans can admit that they had fortune to do it though, it doesn't detract from the achievement any.

Jivin Turkey

This poll is the biggest load of garbage.

Having read back through it its actually really annoying me. The title of the poll (and many peoples posts) indicates that Liverpools victory was predominantly down to luck. That is pure and unadulterated horse crap.

Im sure every single Liverpool fan will admit they had some degree of luck during the 15 game run. But to claim that the run as a whole was "lucky" is wrong, plain and simple.

I asked for examples of luck and got X chance and Y's miss. Like Liverpool never missed a sitter during the competition. Then we had another teams injuries, like Liverpool didnt have an injury over the seaon. Then we had Gerrards peno, which was a peno, being lucky, but Baros being chopped down undeniably in Leverkusen at 0-0 not mattering because Liverpool were "slaughtering" Leverkusen. Peno's are obviously down to luck but something tells me if I tried to argue that Liverpool were unlucky had they lost on penos I would be told where to go and that true class and experience came through.

They were also apparently lucky to win the CL this year as they havnt won a league in 15 years, or because they might or might not defend the title next year.

Get over it lads, Liverpool were not lucky. Like I said name one thing that went in their favour that didnt happen against them over the competition. I doubt you can, in fact Id nearly say more things went against them. Move the goalposts all you want, Liverpools achievement this year was great, and arguably the greatest achievement by a premiership manager to date, its down to that, not luck.

PS There is an awful smell of troll in here.

smemon

No

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote:

Two goals in the last couple of minutes of a final, now that's luck.

and 3-0 down at HT, back to 3-3 isnt luck no? liverpool were lucky to get out of their group scoring 6 and conceding 3, qualifying barely joint on points with 3rd place side.

milan topped their group losing only to barca at the nou camp, with a +7 goal difference. they played utd and inter off the park scoring 7, conceding none. they got lucky against psv, but managed to sneak the tie 3-3.

i bet liverpool fans didnt think milan were lucky to get past psv :rolleyes:

Trojan

They have a new European manager unfamiliar with the English game but excellent record in Europe.

As the season goes on they fail to play well in the domestic game, but do brilliantly in Europe.

You guys want to chalk it up to luck? lol@you.

eirebhoy

No

I voted yes but I don't really know. There are so many ways you can look at the question. They probably deserved to win all the ties they won so they weren't lucky. Or Chelsea would have probably beaten them with Duff and Robben so they were lucky. I don't know. All I will say is that you won't win any major competition without luck so its hardly taking anything away from Liverpool by voting yes. Were Liverpool the best team in the competition (I'm not talking about individual players)? Probably not. Does that mean they were lucky? I haven't a clue. Feck it, they won it, end of story.

Big Ears

Yes(Liverpool fans)

I voted no as they only seemed to have as much luck as any other team that has won it .

Jivin Turkey

smemon wrote:

and 3-0 down at HT, back to 3-3 isnt luck no? liverpool were lucky to get out of their group scoring 6 and conceding 3, qualifying barely joint on points with 3rd place side.

No Liverpool weren't lucky. 10 points would have qualified from every group bar three, and those three groups had whipping boys in them who managed only one point at most. Liverpools group had 4 good teams.

While they weren't goal crazy only one team conceeded less goals than Liverpool in the groups.

Liverpool were also UNLUCKY against Depor at home where they pummelled them for 90 minutes but just failed to score, and also unlucky against Monaco where it took a blatant handball to lead to the only goal in a dire game that was going nowhere.

smemon wrote:

milan topped their group losing only to barca at the nou camp, with a +7 goal difference. they played utd and inter off the park scoring 7, conceding none. they got lucky against psv, but managed to sneak the tie 3-3.

Scored 7 against United and Inter, good to see UEFA getting credited with two of those goals.

Liverpool played Leverkusen off the park, and then Juve at Anfield, and then performed the job required in Turin. Then beat Chelsea at their own game. None of those teams could have any complaints.

smemon wrote:

i bet liverpool fans didnt think milan were lucky to get past psv :rolleyes:

You being sarcastic here?

I dont think that Milan were lucky. They are/were a better side than PSV demonstrated by scoring at the crucial times despite not being on top.

Pepe LeFrits

No

Trojan wrote:

They have a new European manager unfamiliar with the English game but excellent record in Europe.

As the season goes on they fail to play well in the domestic game, but do brilliantly in Europe.

You guys want to chalk it up to luck? lol@you.

What does Liverpool's failure in the league have to do with anything? (Explaining 5th place based on the manager's unfamiliarity of the English game is a complete load of arse, btw)

jesus_thats_gre

No(Liverpool fans)

I voted Yes and an a Liverpool with the intention of trying to mess up this thread.. Talk about begrudging shower of w*****s....

Ban me please...

The Rooster

Yes(Liverpool fans)

Were Liverpool lucky to win the Champions League?

No, but I was lucky to see it.
5 European Cups in my lifetime, I'm very lucky to have seen that.
Magic!

CHAMPIONS!!

jesus_thats_gre

No(Liverpool fans)

smemon wrote:

and 3-0 down at HT, back to 3-3 isnt luck no? liverpool were lucky to get out of their group scoring 6 and conceding 3, qualifying barely joint on points with 3rd place side.

milan topped their group losing only to barca at the nou camp, with a +7 goal difference. they played utd and inter off the park scoring 7, conceding none. they got lucky against psv, but managed to sneak the tie 3-3.

i bet liverpool fans didnt think milan were lucky to get past psv :rolleyes:

Just for you Smemon.


Definition of Luck:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=luck

1. The chance happening of fortunate or adverse events; fortune: They met one day out of pure luck.
2. Good fortune or prosperity; success: We wish you luck.
3. One's personal fate or lot: It was just my luck to win a trip I couldn't take.

SCULLY

I think it is a tad ungracious to say that Liverpool won the CL because they were lucky. Its true that other teams were unlucky with key injuries at crucial times c'est la vie. Were LFC the best team in the Cl this year - I don't think so, but that does not take away from their achievement.

It is inevitable that comparisons be made between them and the '99 Man Utd win. Utd had a slice of luck in the final with Bayern unable to take their chances but were there on the back of a string of great performances (especially v Juve away). Again they didn't in it simply because they were lucky.

The main difference between the two is the quality of the teams - that Utd team were class and were a dominant force domestically, winning the Pl in the same year - LFC were terrible in the PL and seemed to be saving themselves for the CL.Their performance inthe CL has to be applauded because of the teams limitations but I doubt if this team will become a force domestically.

Lucky to win the CL - no more than anyother past winners, but the best team in Europe - take the red tinted glasses off lads.....

~Rebel~

Its really pointless pointing out particular little niggles. They did have some luckiness (instances that happened to most teams in the competition) and they also had some unluckiness (instances that happened to most teams in the competition). The way the question is asked has a double meaning. realistically they Had luck in winning it, but the question some of the more vocal yes voters (not all) have answered is more based on them not deserving it. Of course they deserved it, fair enough if they had had a game where they were destroyed for 90 minutes, having loads of clear chances against them that were missed and then fluked a win from an og or something, that would be undeserved victory, but that just didn't happen. Yes they had some luck, as every team does, in that every ball depends a little bit on luck, or chance,e.g. before it comes to striker, will it hit a bobble, will striker slice across it, will there be spin on it as it arrives, or will he hit it cleanly into the top corner. Luck is involved in all of this, in almost every element of the game so yes, luck was involved in the Cup Win both good and bad, but not at all to the extent where Liverpool didn't actually deserved to win the Champions League.

redspider

I cant understand this topic coming up again!

This has already been discussed AT LENGTH on the CL Final thread, and I for one know what AT LENGTH means! People have different perceptions of what luck is. People on many occasions dont see luck when it actually happens.

Read the CL final thread to understand what went on in the game, not to make your judgement on the "impression" that you have of the game, the vague memory "now that the dust has settled". You need to know what went on in the game exactly and in detail before you can make a judgement on luck for either team.

Re-watch ALL of Liverpool's CL games in FULL, use slow-mo when necessary, and make notes, use a luck measurement method or scoring system, then come back with an answer as to how lucky (or not) Liverpool were to win the CL. Dont use a hunch, use something objective. Its a bit like trying to judge the speed of a bullet, it cant be done with an impression!


For example, two cases of bad luck for Liverpool which many of you may have missed or forgotten:

1-min: a free kick cross which is mis-directed is well-met by a player who hardly ever scores (Maldini) and his shot goes through 3 Liverpool players who are between him and the goal! A very unlikely goal. How much luck would you assign to that?

The 2nd goal by Milan, Crespo's 1st. The ball goes wide to Shevchenko from Kaka, Crespo is offside when Kaka plays the ball, Shevchenko crosses the ball (not his intention) and it finds Crespo who finishes it into the net. Crespo was OFFSIDE and was interfering with play and its the same phase. The Ref, the linesmen and the Liverpool players (looking at Shevchenko) missed it. That doesnt mean that it was not offside. It was offside. Luck for Milan.

There are other examples and I have already commented on the incidents raised here in the CL final thread.

I realise that this will be discussed for years to come, mainly driven by people who will come out with a flippant remark such as "Liverpool were lucky to win the CL", yet these same people have not watched the game with accuracy. Many people's judgement are clouded by the last incident where Dudek saved at point blank range from Shev. (again, read the CL final thread for the response on that).

Luck is very difficult to measure and I have yet to hear of a scientific way to measure it. Mathematical probabilities can be used in some areas, eg: measuring the luck to win the Lotto, but for things like football its very difficult.

So, it is subjective. Most people, myself included, cant see everything in a game.

Liverpool were not lucky to win the CL.

Redspider

kaimera

it's bitterness on the opposing fans behalf tbqh.

I dont see Liverpool fans starting new threads 2 weeks later.

get over it.

Jivin Turkey

kaimera wrote:

I dont see Liverpool fans starting new threads 2 weeks later.

Or even three weeks later

But pehaps though, maybe not a bad idea.

egan007

PHB wrote:

I've been having this over with a couple of mates now and I was wondering on the general consensus now that the dust has settled.

I personally think they were lucky to win it.
I dont think that detracts from them at all, United were lucky to win it in 99, matches against Juve and Bayern we got quite a bit of luck.

WTF can you please realise that the CL is not one match
There are group stages and a knockout stage before the final
LUCK my ass - hard work - concentration and Fight won it.

At every single stage people -including many o this board- said they would be knocked out, It's this attitude that kept them going.

Kingp35

No

I voted yes purely becsuse I felt at the time that they were very lucky to qualify from their group. It took a last minute goal to be a pretty ordinary greek side to get them through. I think their performances in the group stages bar the depor games(who had their worst season in a long time) werent as good as the knockout stages and they did get lucky to qualify from the group.

From this point on though they were lucky but only the same as every other team were lucky. I dont think you can point out individual misses etc. as being lucky because all teams have these. From the second round to the final liverpool deserved everything they got and when it came to the goal against chelsea I think that maybe that was a bit unlucky as Liverpool would have had a penalty which they probably would have scored and chelsea would have been down a man. All of the other luck they had was reletive to other teams luck.

When it came to the final I feel they had more luck than a team usually has in a game to get back into that game and no liverpool fan can deny it. For example the smicer goal was laughable goalkeeping from dida. Penalty was debateable and the Dudek save was the luckiest save I have ever seen and possibly one of the worst misses I have ever seen. This does constitute liverpool having luck in the final but so does most teams have luck to win a competition. As for the penalty shoot out being lucky its the same for both teams so this cant be considered lucky.

So all in all I think liverpool were lucky in certain aspects and they did have a huge slice of luck in the final to get them back into it but you cant say winning the whole thing was lucky only certain games but I have to say I think the final was one of them. Although saying this I cant think of any team to win a competition who didnt have a game where they were lucky to win.

On another point Jivin you said Milan were not lucky to beat PSV. They clearly were. PSV were by far better in both games and got very unlucky at certain times in the games. Thats a ridiculous comment to say Milan werent lucky because they scored at certain times and so deserved to win. If thats the case no match in the history of football could ever have been won on luck.

uberwolf

No(Liverpool fans)

I voted yes as a pool fan though would reconsider my vote now having read the thread.

It requires an element of luck to win a cup competition. Inescapable reality. Trying to quantify that luck or compare it to previous winners is pointless really.

However flip side, this is a poor Liverpool team, I didn't particuraly fancy their chances, but it still looked like it was their year from early on. I'm going to write an essay in that thread I started, when the opportunity presents itself, on the topic. So lucky? yes. Luckier? how can you tell?

Jivin Turkey

Kingp35 wrote:

I voted yes purely becsuse I felt at the time that they were very lucky to qualify from their group. It took a last minute goal to be a pretty ordinary greek side to get them through. I think their performances in the group stages bar the depor games(who had their worst season in a long time) werent as good as the knockout stages and they did get lucky to qualify from the group.

So because Gerrard scored a goal after 86 minutes (within the alloted time for a football match ironically) in a game that they dominated they were lucky to qualify? It also only took a "last minute" goal because of UEFA's ridiculous rule of away goals counting when teams are level on points.

What about the blatant handball that led to Monaco's goal in their defeat there? What about The countless saves and misses in the Depor game at home?

Kingp35 wrote:

but you cant say winning the whole thing was lucky

Yet you voted yes

Kingp35 wrote:

On another point Jivin you said Milan were not lucky to beat PSV. They clearly were. PSV were by far better in both games and got very unlucky at certain times in the games. Thats a ridiculous comment to say Milan werent lucky because they scored at certain times and so deserved to win. If thats the case no match in the history of football could ever have been won on luck.

Obviously Milan had some degree of luck. But having said that if a team finishes as poorly as PSV did, and a team finishes as clinically as Milan did, and at crucial moments, the team that finishes properly deserves to go through IMO.

Milan went through because THEY scored killer goals at killer times.

alfie

Kingp35 wrote:

It took a last minute goal to be a pretty ordinary greek side to get them through

Actually gerrard scored in the 86th minute,and how was beating olympiakos lucky?We knew we had to win by 1-0 or 2 clear goals and we did,we absolutely battered them in the 2nd half.
Yes liverpool got a bit of luck along the way, but to suggest the were lucky to win the whole competition is just bitter imo.They also had some bad decisions against them saviola's handball which led to monaco's goal,alonso missing the 2nd leg of the chelsea game when he never fouled gudjohnsen and the penalty we should have been given in the bay arena when baros was clearly brought down in the box.

PiE

Is this thread not locked yet?

Chucky the tree

wheres the " i dont care" opition?

jesus_thats_gre

No(Liverpool fans)

I am nearly tempted to insult everyone here just to get this bull**** thread closed and get myself banned while I am it so I do not have to listen to pro United ****e from PHB or Smemon for a few weeks..

eirebhoy

No

Liverpool fans - From experience, bias can effect you in many way. For example, I have absolutely no doubt that PHB wouldn't have voted yes if it was Man U or Boro wouldn't have voted yes if it was Middlesbrough. If the poll is 3 to 1 in favour of lucky than I wouldn't be so sure if i were you. Anyway, I really don't care. Its over anyway.

Chucky the tree

eirebhoy wrote:

Liverpool fans - From experience, bias can effect you in many way. For example, I have absolutely no doubt that PHB wouldn't have voted yes if it was Man U or Boro wouldn't have voted yes if it was Middlesbrough. If the poll is 3 to 1 in favour of lucky than I wouldn't be so sure if i were you. Anyway, I really don't care. Its over anyway.

bias can also effect united fans against us aswell!

jesus_thats_gre

No(Liverpool fans)

eirebhoy wrote:

Liverpool fans - From experience, bias can effect you in many way. For example, I have absolutely no doubt that PHB wouldn't have voted yes if it was Man U or Boro wouldn't have voted yes if it was Middlesbrough. If the poll is 3 to 1 in favour of lucky than I wouldn't be so sure if i were you. Anyway, I really don't care. Its over anyway.

I didnt and am not suggestion I cannot be biased.. But this is pathetic..

PHB

No

I have absolutely no doubt that PHB wouldn't have voted yes if it was Man U

PHB
United were lucky to win it in 99

Hmmm

Kingp35

No

alfie wrote:

Actually gerrard scored in the 86th minute,and how was beating olympiakos lucky?

Please point out where i said winning that particular game was "lucky"? I said it took a last minute goal(ok a very late goal) to win.

alfie wrote:

Yes liverpool got a bit of luck along the way, but to suggest the were lucky to win the whole competition is just bitter imo

Also point out where I said winning the whole competition was lucky? If you actually read my post(which you obviously didnt) i said

you cant say winning the whole thing was lucky

either you are incredibly dumb or just chose to ignore that part.

Jivin Turkey wrote:

What about The countless saves and misses in the Depor game at home?

Kingp35 wrote:

I think their performances in the group stages bar the depor games(who had their worst season in a long time) werent as good as the knockout stages

Maybe its a little clearer to you now there Jivin. Notice the part "bar the depor games".

Jivin Turkey wrote:

Yet you voted yes

Yes I did because every team has luck to win a trophy and that includes your beloved Liverpool. Other teams had luck too but so did Liverpool. If you think they had no luck then there is something seriously wrong with you. Nobody could possibly be that biased. they had some luck at times hence I voted yes.

Lads could you do me a favour and read my post first before posting. Makes things a whole lot easier. Or do liverpool fans just choose to ignore every part of a post that doesnt mean their team is perfect. They got lucky at times just like other teams. End of Story

redspider

Kingp35 wrote:

For example the smicer goal was laughable goalkeeping from dida. Penalty was debateable and the Dudek save was the luckiest save I have ever seen and possibly one of the worst misses I have ever seen.

Did you read the CL Final thread again? I thought I explained it there. The Smicer goal was not very lucky. You say it was "laughable" yet it was less lucky than the Maldini goal. Watch them again and compare. Come back and tell us which one was more lucky.

The penalty was not debateable. I dont know how many times I have to say this. Gerrard got pulled back twice, Gatuso's foot tangled with Gerrards foot, and he went down. Penalty. Its true that he went down with some "role play", but all players have to do this in the modern game for the ref to blow. That is a fault of the game and the refs, not the players, per se. The penalty is NOT debatable. If you are in some doubt, then watch it again ... TEN times and in slow-mo frame by frame ... watch it extensively, then, and only then come back with a judgement that is worth any value. Until then, your opinion is of the "uninformed type" I'm afraid.

I'm not saying you Kingp35 are at fault. I am similarly at fault when I watch a game only once and try and inform an opinion on it, or indeed read a report about a game. Reports are not accurate. I try my best, like you do, but if I want to be sure, I have to study the issue very very carefully.

A poll like this is bound to cause problems because luck is very subjective indeed and fans of opposing sides will look at the same event yet come away with a different feeling of the amount of luck. Luck is part of football, some say you cant win anything without luck, some say you make our own luck, and some say luck balances out. My own belief is that over a single season luck doesnt balance itself out. But in the case of Liverpool and the CL, on a scale of luckiness from 1-10 with 10 being very lucky, and 1 being unlucky, Liverpool were very much towards the middle.

An example of a lucky Liverpool win if you want one, was the 2001 FA Cup Final win over Arsenal, the 2-1 "Owen" final. Liverpool were lucky, perhaps at about 7 on the scale, as Arsenal missed so many chances that on another day would have gone in. I admit to that one and I have no problem telling Arsenal fans that.

But the CL win, not lucky - imo :-).

As Einstein once said, "just because you are voted down, it does not mean you are wrong".

Redspider

Kingp35

No

redspider wrote:

The Smicer goal was not very lucky. You say it was "laughable" yet it was less lucky than the Maldini goal. Watch them again and compare. Come back and tell us which one was more lucky.

I tend to disagree. An international goalkeeper playing in the champions league final should be expected to save that shot. In fact most goalkeepers should be expected to save that shot. Whichever way you view that shot it wasnt anything special and should have been saved. To me that means there was luck involved. Maybe your right about the maldini goal but I am only talking about pieces of luck liverpool had, I have already mentioned other teams also were lucky.

The penalty was not debateable. I dont know how many times I have to say this. Gerrard got pulled back twice, Gatuso's foot tangled with Gerrards foot, and he went down. Penalty. Its true that he went down with some "role play", but all players have to do this in the modern game for the ref to blow.

This again is a matter of opinion. I have seen the game countless times. My brother is an avid liverpool fan and we have watched it a few times looking at various aspects. There was very limited contact between the two players and Gerrard flung himself to the ground. Many a time a decision like that is not given.Gerrard could easily have stayed on his feet but chose not to do so.This to me means he was fortunate to get the penalty ie it was debateable in my eyes at least. No offence redspider but you could analyse this a hundred times and I would not change my mind.

I'm not saying you Kingp35 are at fault. I am similarly at fault when I watch a game only once and try and inform an opinion on it, or indeed read a report about a game. Reports are not accurate. I try my best, like you do, but if I want to be sure, I have to study the issue very very carefully.

Assumption is the mother of all fúck ups

But the CL win, not lucky - imo :-).

Your right the overall champions league win itself can not be considered lucky but Redspider realise this is not only to do with the Milan game where liverpool did have luck.(you have already pointed out a piece of Milan luck). I was pointing out the various times throughout the competition where liverpool had a slice of luck. I never said they has more than any otehr team and I also said that the luck they had was reletive to every other team. If anything i'm actually backing up the fact that Liverpool were not lucky to win the entire tournament.

Every team has luck to win a tournament. Liverpool had it and because of that a "yes" vote was the only answer.

They had luck just like every other team.

Do you not agree with this statement and realise the points I am making?

Bannor

There was no luck involved - it was destiny.