Topic: Liverpool 0-2 West Brom - Round Table

[Red Bird]

The errors, as a rule are made by the 'defensive' unit, which means our CB pairing, and GK.
Is this a problem caused in part by our FB's being pushed on so far? If Martin, or Daniel have the ball the opposition needs only to pressure our fullbacks, who are generally a lot higher up, to create a real dilemma, one half decent mobile striker targets the CB's and we look very, very nervous, and instead of looking for row Z, we look as if we've been told it's no longer an option.

I think it's also a problem with our central midfield who tend not to offer an outlet for under-pressure centre-halves and, even more crucially, are easily by-passed on a counter-attack.

So I make it whole team defending and a coaching issue.

[L666KOP]

I think it's also a problem with our central midfield who tend not to offer an outlet for under-pressure centre-halves and, even more crucially, are easily by-passed on a counter-attack.

Correct, and when they do, it pulls the whole midfield out of shape.
It's a strange one, he must have confidence that Martin and Daniel will get there, why else would he authorise new contracts for them ?
Now's the time to find out, get the pair back together, and give them the rest of the season to improve, especially now that Lucas is getting back up to speed.
The remaining games should see Brendan being able to formulate whether they can hack it as a unit.

[wah00ey]

Having given it a few days to calm down and rationalise somewhat, I've read this thread again and I have to agree almost entirely with Vulmea, although it's a shame the shift key on his keyboard is broken ;-)

The owners have got us into this situation now where they have backed a young, unproven, inexperienced manager for a long term (5 years?) project.  They are not going to invest hundreds of millions in players and must be banking on financial fair play working in the forseable, restricting the spending power of the wealthier clubs than us.  During this period, the hope must be that Rodgers can mould his group of youthful purchases and academy players, realise their potential and build a Champions League / Premiership competitive team.

That is a HUGE gamble.  To my untrained eye, we're a long way off this.  We're not even ahead of when Kenny was in charge and I vehemently disagree with those who think we are.  How telling that Hendo and Downing were our best players on Monday and have arguably been since the Oldham debacle.  What might Kenny have achieved if we'd got Sturridge instead of Carroll in the Torres sale?  I'm pretty sure we wanted that deal but only on a loan basis?  Anyway, for me the problem is the stubborness of Rodgers.  I don't think he recognises it when he's got it wrong, he just believes totally in his formations and system.  I don't care who the defenders are, this fannying around on the edge of our box is doomed to fail a number of times every season when teams pressure us high up the pitch, it's too risky a strategy.  You don't often see the Mancs or Arsenal trying that rubbish.

The formation was wrong before kick off for me on Monday.  After 15 minutes, why was that not as clear as day for Brendan?  If it's wrong, CHANGE IT!  I'm not saying make 3 substitutions but FFS don't leave on a lad having a stinker simply in the hope that it comes right in the end.  It was never going to.  If he's concerned about upsetting poor Jonjo then he clearly doesn't give a flying preoverbial about Borini's state of mind.  There was a clear opportunity to slot him directly in as a replacement for Sturridge and give him a chance in his correct position.  Instead, Jonjo got 3/4 game out of position and when Borini came on he had one chance a fluffed it - I wonder how his head is now?  I wonder how Shelvey's head is now?  What a clusterfuck.

I still for the life of me cannot understand why Kenny went.  If they didn't like the way he was with the press then Stevie Clark should have been wheeled out to face them and Kenny given some space.  I'm certain he WAS the right man for the job but that's gone now and we're left with a manager who might be.  As I've said earlier, I'll continue to back Brendan but he's trending downwards for me, I so dearly hope he isn't as bloody minded as I think he is 'cos if he is, we'll be right where we are now in 5 years time.  It's time for him to start asking himself questions.  Is he learning from these mistakes?  Could he do things better or differently?  You need to react in a game, not always wait for 60 minutes before deciding to make any changes.  That was one of Rafa's failings and whoever decided that waiting until 2/3 of the game is gone before making an unforced substitution ain't no coaching genius.  Too many managers are guilty of this and I don't want ours to be.  Unfortunately, I don't Brendan will even be looking in the mirror...

[pewithree3]

how fat was the referee, he didn`t seem to move more than
15 metres from the centre spot into each half.

[LiamG]

It has to be a mentality issue within the squad, we had the same problems before Rogers even took over even going back to the end of Rafa's reign, It just shows you how much of a job Brendan has in getting this squad competing consistently and removing the mistakes we have been making

We all know how good of a defence and midfield we have, but sometimes lapses in concentration is their downfall, But can be improved on because we all know they are very good players we have

[redmark]

no it explains 10 minutes of the game were we gave up after west brom scored when other teams would battle back and equalise maybe even win - did we have any chanaces after they scored?

it explains how we fold and lose the lead so often and settle for a draw

it explains playing like a pub team against Oldham

it explains how we can score early and then cruise to 5 - 0 because things go our way - no problem with quality then , no problem with clinical finishing -

one game...........

if it was just one game when we've 'just not converted our chances'  then ok, two three, four  mmm but two years and successive managers - there's a common thread somewhere - we can't always be unlucky

The discussion - and you'd already mentioned it yourself - was as much about the poor performance from the start of the game. Conceding near the end didn't cause lethargy from the first minute.

[Cassiel]

Mourinho? Really?

I would take just about anyone before that classless lying drama queen shitbag. Winning isn't that important.

This, a million times. I don't like the bloke, his sub-NLP methods, the chaos and the crassness. Whatever success it would bring would feel tainted. That might seem overly precious but it's honestly felt. I want us to win, but I'd rather not see everything sold down the river in pursuit.

[L666KOP]

The discussion - and you'd already mentioned it yourself - was as much about the poor performance from the start of the game. Conceding near the end didn't cause lethargy from the first minute.

Perhaps there 'was no need' to step it up, we were creating chances, they didn't get a shot away until the clock started with an 8.
The players possibly thought, "with all this domination, something will go in"

[Carlos: Very Kickable]

Wow – fantastic post PoP even for your very high standards; it was great to have a whistlestop tour through our history. I have very similar memories to you and it was nice to revisit them – thankyou for taking the time to write.

I agree with your analysis that three at the back would suit us better in terms of achieving results against certain teams – but here we return to the crux of the problem that Rodgers has in this match and during his first season in charge generally.

The question – oddly – is whether we are actually trying to win matches during his first season.
Obviously the eventual aim is to win every match we start but during his first season there is a balance to be struck of winning enough matches to make some progress, keep the owners and fans happy and on the other hand to test out our players in pressure situations to see if they make the grade or not. Going three at the back might win us the game but mask our underlying problems until the next transfer window has passed.

This necessarily means that we are going to have a number of games where we draw or lose as those players unable to cope with the system are weeded out. In fact, as I’ve mentioned on another thread, if we had the ability to completely write off this season we could get those matches out of the way and go through the losses we needed in one fell swoop.

The instant fourth place becomes a  write-off (surely not far away) we should cut our losses and start planning for next season. Coates, for example, needs to be assessed at this level which means he needs a run of 5-10 games at the back to see whether we should replace him in Summer, loan him or think  about building our future back line around him. Of course that approach takes a LOT of courage – especially when you come from a relatively unproven background; but it’s the smart move

For me, this match wasn’t as depressing as it could have been because it has been valuable in highlighting our deficiencies. We have learnt far more about some of the players in that team than we would have had we fluked two early goals.

I think Rodgers has the analytical style and ruthlessness to assess where we need to strengthen – for me his most telling quote remains:

"….that's the problem with being a manager; it's like trying to build an aircraft while it is flying.
You don't get time to put it in the hanger and do everything you need and send it out there, you have to try and do it while it's flying”

[wah00ey]

This, a million times. I don't like the bloke, his sub-NLP methods, the chaos and the crassness. Whatever success it would bring would feel tainted. That might seem overly precious but it's honestly felt. I want us to win, but I'd rather not see everything sold down the river in pursuit.

Can't stand him either but would love Brendan to grow a pair like his in terms of brave and early substitutions ;-)

[Motty]

Congratulations PoP on a fucking brilliant post

[redmark]

Perhaps there 'was no need' to step it up, we were creating chances, they didn't get a shot away until the clock started with an 8.
The players possibly thought, "with all this domination, something will go in"

Again, you're answering a different point. We weren't dominating and creating chances from the first minute. We were misplacing passes, running into blind alleys and sauntering around the pitch pretty much immediately, though. We were flat from the very first minute, as was the crowd. Why? Just one of those nights? That's all I'm trying to get at, and with no pitchfork in hand.

Ok, a comparison with the Norwich game (both at home, to previously struggling sides) to try to illustrate. Did we get frustrated the longer we went without scoring? Did we play well until missing the penalty? We're going to have to use stats, whether people detest them or not, because clearly people have different recollections of how games went (assuming they watched them at all, rather than just categorise them in their preferred manner). Now, I recall some pattern at the start of the game and have only looked up the stats for this post.

Against Norwich, we scored in the 25th minute. Including the goal, we'd had 6 shots - 2 on target, 3 off, 1 blocked. Against West Brom in the same 25 minutes, we actually had 7 shots (3 on, 2 off, 2 blocked). Great - we started quite well, then, and just needed an early breakthrough?

Well, not really.

In that first 25 minutes against Norwich, we completed 196 of 211 passes (93%). Norwich had just 56/78 (72%) - moreover, we attempted almost three times as many passes, indicative of our 'domination' of the ball. Thus, regardless of the number of shots, the goal can be seen as the culmination of pressure.

In the same period against West Brom, we completed 144 of 173 passes (83%), against WBA's 97/127 (76%). We attempted somewhat less than one and a half times the number of passes they did; infact, for the first 15 minutes they had more of the ball than we did (at 10 minutes, they'd attempted almost 50% more passes than we had; at 15 minutes, we'd completed the same and were just behind on attempted). We were not dominating. We started slowly; we gradually got hold of the ball more, but still weren't as good at keeping it as we were against Norwich. Notably, our pass completion rate hadn't improved at the point we conceded the goal (82%) - but it didn't get much worse after conceding, either (dipping by a fraction).

As some have said in this thread and the post-match chimp's tea party, we weren't creating good chances as a result of concerted pressure. We had more shots against West Brom - both in that opening spell or overall - than against Norwich - would anyone seriously suggest we were more threatening? The difference isn't the number of (isolated) efforts, but the domination of the ball. We didn't have it - remotely - on Monday. And that was evident from the start, and didn't significantly change over the course of the game.

[Thog]

I think Rodgers has the analytical style and ruthlessness to assess where we need to strengthen – for me his most telling quote remains:

"….that's the problem with being a manager; it's like trying to build an aircraft while it is flying.
You don't get time to put it in the hanger and do everything you need and send it out there, you have to try and do it while it's flying”

That's a brilliant quote from Rodgers, great analogy that really sums up where we're at right now. Well in reality, it's the same for every manager but it seems more fitting for us. Liverpool have been in transition for around 3 + 1/2 years now and if we keep chopping and changing managers then we will fall deeper into the realms of midtable. We've now got a certain way of playing that isn't going to change every week like it did last season. It's this kind of stability that the club needs right now. No manager would have come here and brought instant success in our current predicament. 

This is why we need to give him time, the squad is not how he wants and until he can really put his stamp on it then it's unfair to already cry for his dismissal. By all means discuss flaws of his because he's not exempt to criticism, of course we need to see signs that he's the right manager long term unlike say Hodgson and for me he has shown these signs.

[helmboy_nige]

If Skrtel has been dropped because of poor form, do we start the next game with Carragher and Sama at centre back? In all seriousness, Agger was at fault yet again tonight. Are his mistakes born more from a fault in the system, or is it just pure sloppiness on his part?

Feels like he's on poor form as well, but then what can Rodgers do?  I'd anticipate an overhaul of the defence in the summer

What the hell happened to Glen Johnson, and was tonight the real Jose Enrique, or just a bad game?

Poor game from both of them, which I can't explain other than they just didn't seem up for it, and once we conceded the faces suggested "here we go again".

Gerrard and Lucas looked extremely sluggish tonight - a consequence of the Brazil game on Wednesday perhaps? Lucas still looks off to me too, and you do start to wonder whether he'll ever be the same player again. There was one moment in particular when Brunt just ghosted past him, and despite his best efforts, Lucas couldn't get back in to close him down again.

Lucas is still off the pace and so was Gerrard, but given the number of games we've played in quick succession alongside an international friendly, it isn't surprising.  Having said all this though, we could and should have won the game.  Despite a very sluggish performance we were the better team and created a lot of good chances prior to their goal.  On a different day we'd have walked that.

Was Shelvey's performance due to a lack of game time, or a general problem with his game, or both? You can see the potential in him, but there is so many ragged edges on him still. He often got in the way of others tonight, and he was slack off the ball too.

I do feel for Shelvey, but while there is an argument we should cut him some slack because of his age, this was a great chance for him to stake a claim and he didn't take it.  Other players have been challenged by Rodgers and risen to it.  There is great potential in him, but right now I'm not seeing enough of a finished product.  I'd favour seeing him going out on loan so he can play more games.

Downing MOTM. After taking a lot of criticism during his time here, a bit of praise due surely?

He was superb.  But it didn't pass onto the rest of the team.

Suarez had an off night tonight. Dwelt on the ball and ran down dead ends. Nice rabona though.

It was a backwards step, a classic example of if Suarez doesn't play well we struggle.  It's ironic given he's only been with us for a month, but we massively missed Sturridge!

Given how much he struggled to get into the game, can we rely on Borini as a replacement for Sturridge when he's not available, or do we have to change things around like we did tonight?

Borini is yet another player who needs to get games.  Can he be a Sturridge replacement?  Possibly.  To be fair to him, judging based on a subs performance is harsh.  He got into some great positions and the pass didn't come.  He just feels like a player that needs a couple of goals.

I'm still pretty miserable about that result, but maybe more because we should have won it.  We didn't play well, but I don't buy into the media crap that says Clarks tactics were perfect.  We had over 20 shots to their 4.  They offered nothing until Lukaku came on and that was their only game plan.  Hope to be 0-0 on 70 mins and then through Lukaku on.  If we'd scored the 2 or 3 we should have it wouldn't have mattered.

That being said we still have a major confidence problem.  I was at the game and I had no confidence that the penalty would go in.  Maybe if it had been in the first half the confidence would have been there.  But it was late on and we'd already been thwarted enough times.

Must bounce back against Swansea.

[dnkw]

Can't stand him either but would love Brendan to grow a pair like his in terms of brave and early substitutions ;-)

He has performed brave and early substitutions though. Suso at home to Man U was an exceptionally ballsy thing to do.  He also took him off at half time against Chelsea.

And he also brought Sturridge on against the Mancs away at half time.

[keyo]

Perhaps there 'was no need' to step it up, we were creating chances, they didn't get a shot away until the clock started with an 8.
The players possibly thought, "with all this domination, something will go in"

i do think this is actually one of our problems, and has been for a while.....we have a number of really good players, and we can discuss them all day long.....henderson, allen, sterling, gerrard, suarez, agger, johnson, etc etc etc......one of the things i think happens with us is that we "expect" things to happen too much....suarez "makes" things happen, gerrard makes things happen, but by and large too often our players allow suarez to be the one to make things happen, and just "do their job" which looks good, and can be analysed to death, but produces a subtotal of nothing in the end............confidence makes a difference to this, i believe, but it is not only confidence.....we need more players who want to be the one to score the goal, or make the killer pass, or make the run behind the defender, or attack the ball in the box/on the edge of the box, to go force the mistake, to make the tackle before a break becomes too dangerous to defend....take risks effectively, with the confidence of knowing if the risk fails it will not backfire spectacularly because we all know what to do when we lose the ball or miss a tackle....attacking wise, sturridge will help, but i think in midfield and defensively we need more of this

[mkingdon]

That's a brilliant quote from Rodgers, great analogy that really sums up where we're at right now. Well in reality, it's the same for every manager but it seems more fitting for us. Liverpool have been in transition for around 3 + 1/2 years now and if we keep chopping and changing managers then we will fall deeper into the realms of midtable. We've now got a certain way of playing that isn't going to change every week like it did last season. It's this kind of stability that the club needs right now. No manager would have come here and brought instant success in our current predicament. 

This is why we need to give him time, the squad is not how he wants and until he can really put his stamp on it then it's unfair to already cry for his dismissal. By all means discuss flaws of his because he's not exempt to criticism, of course we need to see signs that he's the right manager long term unlike say Hodgson and for me he has shown these signs.

I know there is an element of rose coloured glasses here, but I would say the last time we could claim not to be in transition was around 07-09, as Rafa had more or less got HIS team together.


                 Reina

Johnson  Carra  Hyypia  Risse

Kuyt  Masch  Alonso   Riera

         Gerrard
                 
                  Torres


Compare that to the current "best 11" and you can appreciate the distance we have regressed.


                Reina

Johnson   Skrtel  Agger  Enrique


    Gerrard           Lucas
   
           Henderson

Downing   Sturridge   Suarez


One thing that strikes me is the lack of power and "running" in the current 11 compared to 07-09.

Hyypia, Carra (at his peak), Kuyt, Masch and even Alonso to some extent feel a bit like men vs boys compared to the likes of some players from today's squad.  Literally in some cases they are (Suso, Sterling, Allen, Wisdom etc) but they are not first 11 regulars.

Our inconsistency lies there I feel, certainly against teams that rely more on a physical presence.  We could do with a bit of steel to compliment the silk.

[Sevo]

Having given it a few days to calm down and rationalise somewhat, I've read this thread again and I have to agree almost entirely with Vulmea, although it's a shame the shift key on his keyboard is broken ;-)

The owners have got us into this situation now where they have backed a young, unproven, inexperienced manager for a long term (5 years?) project.  They are not going to invest hundreds of millions in players and must be banking on financial fair play working in the forseable, restricting the spending power of the wealthier clubs than us.  During this period, the hope must be that Rodgers can mould his group of youthful purchases and academy players, realise their potential and build a Champions League / Premiership competitive team.

That is a HUGE gamble.  To my untrained eye, we're a long way off this.  We're not even ahead of when Kenny was in charge and I vehemently disagree with those who think we are.  How telling that Hendo and Downing were our best players on Monday and have arguably been since the Oldham debacle.  What might Kenny have achieved if we'd got Sturridge instead of Carroll in the Torres sale?  I'm pretty sure we wanted that deal but only on a loan basis?  Anyway, for me the problem is the stubborness of Rodgers.  I don't think he recognises it when he's got it wrong, he just believes totally in his formations and system.  I don't care who the defenders are, this fannying around on the edge of our box is doomed to fail a number of times every season when teams pressure us high up the pitch, it's too risky a strategy.  You don't often see the Mancs or Arsenal trying that rubbish.

The formation was wrong before kick off for me on Monday.  After 15 minutes, why was that not as clear as day for Brendan?  If it's wrong, CHANGE IT!  I'm not saying make 3 substitutions but FFS don't leave on a lad having a stinker simply in the hope that it comes right in the end.  It was never going to.  If he's concerned about upsetting poor Jonjo then he clearly doesn't give a flying preoverbial about Borini's state of mind.  There was a clear opportunity to slot him directly in as a replacement for Sturridge and give him a chance in his correct position.  Instead, Jonjo got 3/4 game out of position and when Borini came on he had one chance a fluffed it - I wonder how his head is now?  I wonder how Shelvey's head is now?  What a clusterfuck.

I still for the life of me cannot understand why Kenny went.  If they didn't like the way he was with the press then Stevie Clark should have been wheeled out to face them and Kenny given some space.  I'm certain he WAS the right man for the job but that's gone now and we're left with a manager who might be.  As I've said earlier, I'll continue to back Brendan but he's trending downwards for me, I so dearly hope he isn't as bloody minded as I think he is 'cos if he is, we'll be right where we are now in 5 years time.  It's time for him to start asking himself questions.  Is he learning from these mistakes?  Could he do things better or differently?  You need to react in a game, not always wait for 60 minutes before deciding to make any changes.  That was one of Rafa's failings and whoever decided that waiting until 2/3 of the game is gone before making an unforced substitution ain't no coaching genius.  Too many managers are guilty of this and I don't want ours to be.  Unfortunately, I don't Brendan will even be looking in the mirror...

I agree with your view. The WBA game was a micro-cosim of Rodgers' performance: picks the wrong team, everyone can see it's not working except him, daft substitutions and inane after match comments. Given the schizophrenic nature of the performances, you wonder if the team performs as it does whatever Rodgers dictates.

[Corkboy]

I agree with your view. The WBA game was a micro-cosim of Rodgers' performance: picks the wrong team, everyone can see it's not working except him, daft substitutions and inane after match comments.

Please. Up to the penalty, we had umpteen chances and West Brom offered nothing except an inspired keeper and some last ditch defending. We dominated the game. If Gerrard had scored his peno, we would have been out of sight. He didn't, they nicked one, shit happens.

[mulfella]

Please. Up to the penalty, we had umpteen chances and West Brom offered nothing except an inspired keeper and some last ditch defending. We dominated the game. If Gerrard had scored his peno, we would have been out of sight. He didn't, they nicked one, shit happens.

Quite.

[wah00ey]

Please. Up to the penalty, we had umpteen chances and West Brom offered nothing except an inspired keeper and some last ditch defending. We dominated the game. If Gerrard had scored his peno, we would have been out of sight. He didn't, they nicked one, shit happens.

Nah, shit is happening far too often and in a far too predictable way. Most of our chances were from range and whenever looked like scoring unless it was going to be from a real screamer. As Vulmea has said, if Gerrard had scored the penalty we probably still wouldn't have won with that performance and mentality.

[God's Left Peg]

Fuck.

That is some post.

[L666KOP]

Again, you're answering a different point. We weren't dominating and creating chances from the first minute. We were misplacing passes, running into blind alleys and sauntering around the pitch pretty much immediately, though. We were flat from the very first minute, as was the crowd. Why? Just one of those nights? That's all I'm trying to get at, and with no pitchfork in hand.

Ok, a comparison with the Norwich game (both at home, to previously struggling sides) to try to illustrate. Did we get frustrated the longer we went without scoring? Did we play well until missing the penalty? We're going to have to use stats, whether people detest them or not, because clearly people have different recollections of how games went (assuming they watched them at all, rather than just categorise them in their preferred manner). Now, I recall some pattern at the start of the game and have only looked up the stats for this post.

Against Norwich, we scored in the 25th minute. Including the goal, we'd had 6 shots - 2 on target, 3 off, 1 blocked. Against West Brom in the same 25 minutes, we actually had 7 shots (3 on, 2 off, 2 blocked). Great - we started quite well, then, and just needed an early breakthrough?

Well, not really.

In that first 25 minutes against Norwich, we completed 196 of 211 passes (93%). Norwich had just 56/78 (72%) - moreover, we attempted almost three times as many passes, indicative of our 'domination' of the ball. Thus, regardless of the number of shots, the goal can be seen as the culmination of pressure.

In the same period against West Brom, we completed 144 of 173 passes (83%), against WBA's 97/127 (76%). We attempted somewhat less than one and a half times the number of passes they did; infact, for the first 15 minutes they had more of the ball than we did (at 10 minutes, they'd attempted almost 50% more passes than we had; at 15 minutes, we'd completed the same and were just behind on attempted). We were not dominating. We started slowly; we gradually got hold of the ball more, but still weren't as good at keeping it as we were against Norwich. Notably, our pass completion rate hadn't improved at the point we conceded the goal (82%) - but it didn't get much worse after conceding, either (dipping by a fraction).

As some have said in this thread and the post-match chimp's tea party, we weren't creating good chances as a result of concerted pressure. We had more shots against West Brom - both in that opening spell or overall - than against Norwich - would anyone seriously suggest we were more threatening? The difference isn't the number of (isolated) efforts, but the domination of the ball. We didn't have it - remotely - on Monday. And that was evident from the start, and didn't significantly change over the course of the game.

But the points are interlinked aren't they.

There's a trend that's emerged, against teams that want/try to play football we do really well, even Arsenal and City were put to the sword for large spells. It's blindingly obvious we can match, or better teams that go toe to toe with us.
As you say, we created more against West Brom, but it just didn't look as pretty, that's because they didn't let us look pretty, they harried us, pressed us, got their foot in. They sit back for spells inviting us on to them, in short, they can mix their styles up a bit. The 'footballing' teams haven't done that for all the games. We made Arsenal; look amateurish for an hour, played them off the park at their own game, but when Wenger got them in our faces, we crumbled.
Same with City, same with Utd, it's a trend, and until Brendan can instill a 'bit of steel' it will continue.
We are the Arsenal of 10 years ago.

[Funky_Gibbons]

Nah, shit is happening far too often and in a far too predictable way. Most of our chances were from range and whenever looked like scoring unless it was going to be from a real screamer. As Vulmea has said, if Gerrard had scored the penalty we probably still wouldn't have won with that performance and mentality.

We must have been watching a different game. We had something like 23-shots on goal, that's nearly one every four minutes. They were not all long shots. We had plenty of shots from inside the area and plenty of passes across the face of the six yard box with no-one there to put them away (Sturridge would have had a field day).

If Gerrard had put that penalty away we would have walked the rest of the game as WBA would have needed to have attacked more.

[L666KOP]

We must have been watching a different game. We had something like 23-shots on goal, that's nearly one every four minutes. They were not all long shots. We had plenty of shots from inside the area and plenty of passes across the face of the six yard box with no-one there to put them away (Sturridge would have had a field day).

If Gerrard had put that penalty away we would have walked the rest of the game as WBA would have needed to have attacked more.

But we got beat, so obviously we were shit.   

We were the victims of a smash and grab, due in most part to our woeful finishing, if we'd have been 3 up they wouldn't have had the heart for a fightback, let alone attempt to win the game.

[Draex]

Nah, shit is happening far too often and in a far too predictable way. Most of our chances were from range and whenever looked like scoring unless it was going to be from a real screamer. As Vulmea has said, if Gerrard had scored the penalty we probably still wouldn't have won with that performance and mentality.

You missed the worldie 1 hand save Foster pulled off whilst going the opposite way to Gerrards shot? Nothing long range about that, it was simply a worldclass save.

[mkingdon]

You missed the worldie 1 hand save Foster pulled off whilst going the opposite way to Gerrards shot? Nothing long range about that, it was simply a worldclass save.

Agreed.  That and the penalty and we would have been talking about another convincing home win.

The fact that we fell to pieces in the last 15 minutes is a massive concern though.  The exact opposite mentality to Utd, and we need to change that asap or fade into mediocrity.

[L666KOP]

You missed the worldie 1 hand save Foster pulled off whilst going the opposite way to Gerrards shot? Nothing long range about that, it was simply a worldclass save.

Hendersons backheel was well outside the area though.

And if Agger had converted one of the three chances he had from outside the area we'd have been laughing.

There'll be a stat anaylsis somewhere that proves the statement you replied to to be absolute bollocks.

[Funky_Gibbons]

But we got beat, so obviously we were shit.   

We were the victims of a smash and grab, due in most part to our woeful finishing, if we'd have been 3 up they wouldn't have had the heart for a fightback, let alone attempt to win the game.

Spot-on and this is my problem, everything is either black or white, there is no grey area. We're either going to finish top four or we're totally rubbish.

We did play poorly and three or four of our senior players had possibly their worst games ever, but despite this we still had too much for WBA and should still have won the comfortably considering the good chances we created. They never got a look in, we dominated possession, shots, territory and every other worthwhile statistic.

Their keeper has come out and said that was the best game he had played in his career. It wasn't a case of Rodger's being out though or the team being out fought. We never took our chances and they took the theirs from their second shot on goal. As you say, a typical smash and grab. 

[redmark]

But the points are interlinked aren't they.

There's a trend that's emerged, against teams that want/try to play football we do really well, even Arsenal and City were put to the sword for large spells. It's blindingly obvious we can match, or better teams that go toe to toe with us.
As you say, we created more against West Brom, but it just didn't look as pretty, that's because they didn't let us look pretty, they harried us, pressed us, got their foot in. They sit back for spells inviting us on to them, in short, they can mix their styles up a bit. The 'footballing' teams haven't done that for all the games. We made Arsenal; look amateurish for an hour, played them off the park at their own game, but when Wenger got them in our faces, we crumbled.
Same with City, same with Utd, it's a trend, and until Brendan can instill a 'bit of steel' it will continue.
We are the Arsenal of 10 years ago.

But West Brom actually had more possession in the first 15 minutes. Why - because they're a good footballing team who came to play? No - because we were sloppy and flat from the start. That's my point. Yes we constructed a fair number of chances over the game and should still have won but for a good goalkeeping performance, but by no stretch of the imagination did we play well. And that was evident in our own collective mentality/tempo/accuracy from the first minutes of the game, as backed up by the stats.

[Draex]

We are mid-table, it's about right for where we are at the moment. We lack a winning mentality, make silly errors, and we don't have the depth of a lot of the teams higher than us.

I reckon we'll still get 6th, which is about right for this season.

[redmark]

Spot-on and this is my problem, everything is either black or white, there is no grey area. We're either going to finish top four or we're totally rubbish.

We did play poorly and three or four of our senior players had possibly their worst games ever, but despite this we still had too much for WBA and should still have won the comfortably considering the good chances we created. They never got a look in, we dominated possession, shots, territory and every other worthwhile statistic.

Their keeper has come out and said that was the best game he had played in his career. It wasn't a case of Rodger's being out though or the team being out fought. We never took our chances and they took the theirs from their second shot on goal. As you say, a typical smash and grab. 

But isn't that the point of these threads, to discuss such things? I'm not sure anyone really is saying "we're shit". But isn't it worth discussing what was the enormous gulf in quality between the Norwich game and this game?

[L666KOP]

But West Brom actually had more possession in the first 15 minutes. Why - because they're a good footballing team who came to play? No - because we were sloppy and flat from the start. That's my point. Yes we constructed a fair number of chances over the game and should still have won but for a good goalkeeping performance, but by no stretch of the imagination did we play well. And that was evident in our own collective mentality/tempo/accuracy from the first minutes of the game, as backed up by the stats.

But were we sloppy and wasteful because we had an off day, or perhaps because Clarke did his homework and knew how to disrupt our usual game ?
I think as a fanbase in general we are too eager to say "we were shit" rather than give the opposition any credit. Not aimed at you mate, I know your post history  and you ain't a kneejerker.
But WBA came with a plan, however industrial it was, and pulled it off.

[Funky_Gibbons]

But isn't that the point of these threads, to discuss such things? I'm not sure anyone really is saying "we're shit". But isn't it worth discussing what was the enormous gulf in quality between the Norwich game and this game?

Of course, and there has been an awful lot of good posts in this thread, discussing these points in great detail.

But I have read an awful lot of negativity being thrown at Rodgers and anything associated with him and lead to PoP posting such an impassioned defence of him. There is no discussion or debate going there, just people peddling their agenda's. This is not aimed at you BTW as I enjoy a lot of your posts.

 

 

[redmark]

But were we sloppy and wasteful because we had an off day, or perhaps because Clarke did his homework and knew how to disrupt our usual game ?
I think as a fanbase in general we are too eager to say "we were shit" rather than give the opposition any credit. Not aimed at you mate, I know your post history  and you ain't a kneejerker.
But WBA came with a plan, however industrial it was, and pulled it off.

But if Clarke disrupted our game, how did we create 25 chances?

The crux of my argument (and it isn't a severe attack on Rodgers, just a question mark) is just that we seemed to step onto the pitch deflated and (despite creating plenty of chances through virtue of an underlying gulf in quality), weren't quite 'at it' to impose the sort of concerted pressure and incisiveness we did against Norwich. Thus I've argued with the points made about our 'fragility' when we missed the penalty, or conceded, because I just don't think we were playing well before those events anyway. Did we get worse? Sure. We went from deflated to absolutely flattened. But it wasn't that steep a drop.

Why - after the performance against City? Why the utterly quiet crowd, too? (No stats, but I noticed the clock when I heard a first real bit of encouragement from the Kop, and it was about 63 minutes). My working hypothesis (and I do take on board the international break, particularly the possible impact of Hodgson's training methods on Johnson and Gerrard) would be that we replaced Sturridge with Shelvey (rather than Borini, or Sterling, or Coutinho), which gave us our most 'defensive' front four of the season; when we should have been flying, confident and aggressive, the intent of the selection change seemed conservative and cautious. IMHO, of course.

[redmark]

But I have read an awful lot of negativity being thrown at Rodgers and anything associated with him and lead to PoP posting such an impassioned defence of him. There is no discussion or debate going there, just people peddling their agenda's. This is not aimed at you BTW as I enjoy a lot of your posts.

Fair point, I tend to gloss over posts revealing the underlying agenda (and there's certainly a 'if Rodgers is getting slack for these results, why didn't Dalglish...' one) and perhaps therefore underestimate their prevalence.

[Hinesy]

A great round table, and one that will continue in the Opinion Board shortly.

[arturo_belano]

which gave us our most 'defensive' front four of the season; when we should have been flying, confident and aggressive, the intent of the selection change seemed conservative and cautious. IMHO, of course.

Yes, completely agree with this. We had 2 first team strikers available for a home game against a team that had lost 6 out of its last 8 games. Yet we started with only 1 up front. I was disappointed with Rodgers' selection; it should have been more adventurous.

[L666KOP]

But if Clarke disrupted our game, how did we create 25 chances?

The crux of my argument (and it isn't a severe attack on Rodgers, just a question mark) is just that we seemed to step onto the pitch deflated and (despite creating plenty of chances through virtue of an underlying gulf in quality), weren't quite 'at it' to impose the sort of concerted pressure and incisiveness we did against Norwich. Thus I've argued with the points made about our 'fragility' when we missed the penalty, or conceded, because I just don't think we were playing well before those events anyway. Did we get worse? Sure. We went from deflated to absolutely flattened. But it wasn't that steep a drop.

Why - after the performance against City? Why the utterly quiet crowd, too? (No stats, but I noticed the clock when I heard a first real bit of encouragement from the Kop, and it was about 63 minutes). My working hypothesis (and I do take on board the international break, particularly the possible impact of Hodgson's training methods on Johnson and Gerrard) would be that we replaced Sturridge with Shelvey (rather than Borini, or Sterling, or Coutinho), which gave us our most 'defensive' front four of the season; when we should have been flying, confident and aggressive, the intent of the selection change seemed conservative and cautious. IMHO, of course.

Ha Twat 

I meant that he disrupted our 'pretty' style.
That's why our performance looked to be poles apart from the Norwich game.
I have to pick kids up from school now, I'll deal in a bit more depth when I get back.
 

[Mutton Geoff]

Fair point, I tend to gloss over posts revealing the underlying agenda (and there's certainly a 'if Rodgers is getting slack for these results, why didn't Dalglish...' one) and perhaps therefore underestimate their prevalence.

do you see any of those posts in here,

 its fairly obvious clarke would know how to make Gerrard less effective, was Gerrard less effective?

it is fairly certain he knew that pushing Suarez wide would make him less effective was he pushed or chose to play wide in the first half a lot?

However midway through the second half he put another striker on when he could have played for the draw, did he also know that we run out of steam and concentration in the last minutes of tight games like that one?

Of course he could not have expected us to be so bad and his keeper to be so good,
 but he put enough in place to frustrate us, as for the 25 shots, 7 on target i read a while back in this thread and that included the penalty, so if we go with that, 7 on target 0 goals for us, 4 on target 2 goals for them does this give reason for debate without suggesting that West Brom where just lucky rather than professional and clinical in front of goal.

as for your conspiracy theory how many times did people try and use Rafa as a stick for Kenny?

where any of you one of them?