I like Sean Rogers, has good insight and understands a lot about football and team dynamic - a good regular contributor on The Review and someone who comes at it from a very specific angle that others don’t have. However, he is prone to the occasional false equivalency, usually when bringing in the odd 80s reference to do with Barnes, Dalglish or Ronnie Moran to explain modern day Liverpool. Sometimes it works but it can be a bit of a stretch - no harm really. The issue I have with the habit of always looking to Liverpool's past with a comparative example is that it can, at times, just not really fit; it can feel shoehorned rather than actually providing the context it is intended to do.
The latest Review of the Palace game had arguably the worst example of false equivalency I have heard so far. Sean expressed a nervousness around Liverpool's performance levels as they are not securing clean sheets and heavy wins. This is a perfectly valid position. However, he then went on to use Houllier's 2002/03 season as a basis for his worry.
Honestly, what?!
That side was a busted flush and despite a good start to the season we'd drawn three consecutive games 2-2 to poor sides by the start of September and then proceeded to go 13 league games without a win through the winter. Now compare that to this side of European Champions, almost undefeated in a calendar year, breaking points records and filled with the world's best players. 2002/03 is no more helpful a comparison as the 1993/94 season when we won 4 of our first 5 games before dropping off a cliff.
Just a dead odd call from Sean.
Still, I enjoyed the show...
