I would like one or more of the folks who really understand football to give some analysis of the shots on target and actual chances WHU had against us, including their goal (yes, it was an OG, but it didn't involve a 12-13 pass move from the time they gained possession to the touch by Skrtel).
Not trying to be arrogant by answering but I spoke to you privately specifically about the goal & had just seen the question here.
I think it's harsh to say it's Lucas' fault for the own goal, because a fair bit of time elapses between that and the goal. But if we're in the business of apportioning blame than he just about gets the biggest slice.
I'm acutely aware of the idea of 'luck' since Kenny's season in charge: "we're so unlucky to have hit the post so many times". Lo and behold we buy better players and we score more. Was it that our luck that changed? Is it simply that better players are 'luckier' players? We've hit the post the most in the league this year too, but somehow the ball keeps finding its way into the net as well.
Lucas gave away two fouls in the Everton game that were 'unlucky' to result in goals, and it's the same with getting caught in possession for the eventual West Ham goal.
In the scoring of that own goal- I know I laid into Skrtel in the last Round Table and hopefully I'm not being unfair- again I think Skrtel ends up not knowing where he is; his back to play. Similarly to Lucas, has Skrtel been "unlucky" in the fact that it's mostly his mistakes that are punished (usually as an own goal)? Or is it simply that better (or more in-form) players are luckier? I think I'm much closer to the point with Skrtel than I am with Lucas in taking the line that you make your own luck, because I think Lucas is a decent, intelligent player. Skrtel's a brilliant fourth choice centreback for a top four club, but I don't think much more of him than that. Get luckier or play better players?
One thing I'm sure a few people will have noticed is that the header from Maiga that Mignolet saved in the first half was almost identical to the one we conceded against Norwich. One has seen yet more criticism of Agger in the air, the other barely mentioned in the praise for Sakho (who was beaten by Maiga). The common denominator? Glen Johnson.
Johnson's defensive frailty is overplayed. I DO however think that he is slow, almost lackadaisical, to close his winger down when it comes to cutting inside and crossing. I think Flanagan shows similar traits, though that could be because on the occasions he gets close and doesn't get the ball (or completely woodchip his man) the winger he's after tends to moonwalk past him like Flanno's legs are made of Battenberg. That said, if they're both doing it, is it tactical? I know crosses are relatively 'low risk', but maybe we should focus on showing the winger outside.
That was the first time he and Coutinho - the player to best suit his strengths, if his relationship in the ressies with Adorjan is anything to go by - had started together in a competitive game. Their only time on the pitch together before that was when Coutinho came on against Notts County.
It's important to have a depth to attack, especially with Sturridge out. Suarez can have his games, especially away from home, where he falls further and further back trying to get involved. Sterling can keep defences honest about pushing up on us, as long as there's the threat of Coutinho releasing him. That was there yesterday but not against Hull the previous week.
Joe Allen was superb. Gave us a combination of energy and quality combined that has been lacking this season in our midfield. Whether he would have been able to "earn the right" to play like that in a tough away like the ones coming up is the big question we'll soon get answered, although you'd wager he'd not be playing in the same role as he spent most of yesterday.
I remember you said last season you expected Coutinho would bring out better in Sterling. He was unlucky to sparkle in the shittest version of our team only to have youth etc catch up with him.
I understand it's everyone's prerogative to not rate a player or judge potential for themselves, but honestly when it comes to Sterling I just think some people need to get a fucking grip. Various things such as "he should be scoring at so-and-so rate by now" and "he HAS to score those chances" just don't ring true for me. His movement, threat and overall game intelligence against West Ham screamed talent. Liverpool need him to score these chances, because we're in a scrap for fourth, but we don't need Raheem to score these chances. People want that to be the case, because then we can neatly put either a tick or a cross next to his name. It just doesn't work like that with young players though. We can add the finishing as we go along, and had we a better squad he'd probably be doing that in the relative shade of a loan club.
Ronaldo joined Utd at the age of 18 for over £12mil. That year his record was 14(14) apps 4 goals 4 assists in the league, and is equivalent to the year Sterling is going through now. Sterling in the league so far? 4(6) apps 1 goal 1 assist.
Ronaldo's next year was 25(8 ) appearances 5 goals 4 assists. The next year he improved again with 9 goals & 6 assists but it wasn't til the year after that, the season where he turned 22, that he smashed the 10 goal mark with 17. For those whose brain is itching the basic point is that Sterling has this season, next season, and the season after where he he doesn't have to score 10 league goals to match Ronaldo
Cup competitions? In those first two years Ronaldo did suplement his record with a few FA Cup goals, but none in the other competitions including a full 7(1) Champions League games in his second season without a goal or assist. In fact in his first 20(3) Champions League appearances Ronaldo provided 1 goal and no assists (the goal came in his third season as well). Sign of a young player? Yep. Like Sterling is? Yep.
Raheem Sterling's total number of shots this season is low, but coincidentally so was 18yr old Ronaldo's. What Ronaldo did manage to do was double his total number of shots from that first season to the second. With Sterling following a similar pace to first year Ronaldo, it seems obvious to me that as much as Sterling can improve his finishing, one of the key things he needs to do-like Ronaldo at the same age- is just get more shots in. That's what it looks like he is now doing, and that's one of the markers by which we can say this kid's broken the plateau he obviously reached last season. Ronaldo wasn't wildly upping his goals per games at Sterling's age, but his game was improving. We know as well as most that progress isn't always reflected in the results, but it is in the process. Improved performances with more attempts on goal, rather than needing that name on the scoreboard, are probably a fair indication at this point.
But that's it: 3 goals and 3 assists from Sterling in another 10 starts and 8 sub appearances and he's matching Cristiano Ronaldo at the same age (and 2 FA Cup goals if you want to be pedantic).
Cristiano Ronaldo also had the benefit that at the age Sterling was last year, he was playing at Sporting where he could avoid burnout, hype and England caps.
I'm not saying he's gonna be as good as Ronaldo, obviously, but why not allow yourself at least a little sliver of that hope and excitement he gave you when he first broke into the team. And he broke into the team at the Kop's demand remember. Forget Ibe or your other shiny new toy for a while.
P.S. please play well next week Raheem
