Liverpool FC Forum

[66-1112520797]

I'll say again - the idiocy on this board is quite baffling at times.

To think that half of the gimps on here are actually employed by some poor sap to work in an office is even worse.

Dear oh dear.

Yeah I agree Lando, totally, I wish I could say after every poor perfomance "Rafa is a genius".

The mind boggles.

[Ace Ventura]

And fwiw, I think Torres would have drawn a blank on Sat, as he seems to struggle against deep-lying teams.

Well then I think we got stung for 20 0dd million pounds, if he's never to play at Anfield then.

FFS thats bollox !

A very good point, that is what probably 80% of the teams that come to Anfield will defend like, including Derby a few weeks earlier, when he really struggled.

[Leonmc0708]

I think that this is the more truthful problem people have with rotation. Its not the rotation of the squad per say, but the rotation (out) of Torres that people have a problem with.

Its obvious that a kid who has never played in this league, and never played two or three times a week in a less physical league would have not only made all the difference to our team, he would have been able to handle the pressure. ITs obvious isnt it ?

No its not.

[66-1112520797]

Its obvious that a kid who has never played in this league, and never played two or three times a week in a less physical league would have not only made all the difference to our team, he would have been able to handle the pressure. ITs obvious isnt it ?

No its not.

You dont know if you dont try, there is no point assume-ing he cant handle the physical demands of the Prem as it'll make an a.ss out of you and me.

[Ace Ventura]

I think that this is the more truthful problem people have with rotation. Its not the rotation of the squad per say, but the rotation (out) of Torres that people have a problem with.

Its obvious that a kid who has never played in this league, and never played two or three times a week in a less physical league would have not only made all the difference to our team, he would have been able to handle the pressure. ITs obvious isnt it ?

No its not.

But he never needed to mate, he should of played the game against Portsmouth sat out the Porto game (to show where our priorities lie) played the Birmingham game, thats not even two games in a week never mind three.

I know by the thread you started after the Porto game that you think that selecting a stronger line up for that was better than doing so for the Portsmouth game but again we will agree to disagree on that. I think the priority is the league, and that we would be strong enough to go through in the Champions league even if we had lost to Porto.

[66-1112520797]

But he never needed to mate, he should of played the game against Portsmouth sat out the Porto game (to show where our priorities lie) played the Birmingham game, thats not even two games in a week never mind three.

Eggsackery.

[Leonmc0708]

so is the problem with resting players that people want it to be done as token gestures to "show where our priorities lie" ?

[Ace Ventura]

so is the problem with resting players that people want it to be done as token gestures to "show where our priorities lie" ?

Not sure what you mean mate

[Anfield rapper]

I think that this is the more truthful problem people have with rotation. Its not the rotation of the squad per say, but the rotation (out) of Torres that people have a problem with.

Its obvious that a kid who has never played in this league, and never played two or three times a week in a less physical league would have not only made all the difference to our team, he would have been able to handle the pressure. ITs obvious isnt it ?

No its not.

But he never needed to mate, he should of played the game against Portsmouth sat out the Porto game (to show where our priorities lie) played the Birmingham game, thats not even two games in a week never mind three.

I know by the thread you started after the Porto game that you think that selecting a stronger line up for that was better than doing so for the Portsmouth game but again we will agree to disagree on that. I think the priority is the league, and that we would be strong enough to go through in the Champions league even if we had lost to Porto.

I agree with this. Gerrard and Torres should have started against Portsmouth. If Rafa wanted to rest them, then the Porto match was the time to do it. Even if we lost we would still make it out of the group. It doesn't really matter who wins the groups in the CL because the vast majority of teams that make it through are all going to be tough games anyway. Then against Birmingham he would be able to field his strongest team again. All we needed against Birmingham was one goal and it would have been game over and Torres could have been replaced whether he had scored it or not.

[Leonmc0708]

so is the problem with resting players that people want it to be done as token gestures to "show where our priorities lie" ?

Not sure what you mean mate

I mean that had Rafa played Torres and Gerrard in both Premiership games and we still had the same results, would the fact that Rafa played what people perceive to be "the best team" meant that we would be happy ?

[Leonmc0708]

I think that this is the more truthful problem people have with rotation. Its not the rotation of the squad per say, but the rotation (out) of Torres that people have a problem with.

Its obvious that a kid who has never played in this league, and never played two or three times a week in a less physical league would have not only made all the difference to our team, he would have been able to handle the pressure. ITs obvious isnt it ?

No its not.

But he never needed to mate, he should of played the game against Portsmouth sat out the Porto game (to show where our priorities lie) played the Birmingham game, thats not even two games in a week never mind three.

I know by the thread you started after the Porto game that you think that selecting a stronger line up for that was better than doing so for the Portsmouth game but again we will agree to disagree on that. I think the priority is the league, and that we would be strong enough to go through in the Champions league even if we had lost to Porto.

I agree with this. Gerrard and Torres should have started against Portsmouth. If Rafa wanted to rest them, then the Porto match was the time to do it. Even if we lost we would still make it out of the group. It doesn't really matter who wins the groups in the CL because the vast majority of teams that make it through are all going to be tough games anyway. Then against Birmingham he would be able to field his strongest team again. All we needed against Birmingham was one goal and it would have been game over and Torres could have been replaced whether he had scored it or not.

Tell me how it is possibly easier to make up a 3 point defecit over 5 games than it is to make it up over 35 games ?

[66-1112520797]

I mean that had Rafa played Torres and Gerrard in both Premiership games and we still had the same results, would the fact that Rafa played what people perceive to be "the best team" meant that we would be happy ?

Happier.

[Ace Ventura]

so is the problem with resting players that people want it to be done as token gestures to "show where our priorities lie" ?

Not sure what you mean mate

I mean that had Rafa played Torres and Gerrard in both Premiership games and we still had the same results, would the fact that Rafa played what people perceive to be "the best team" meant that we would be happy ?

Happier, yes definately.

Obviously if we had still drawn then it would of been a bit more of a worry...and left me with f'ck all to whinge about for 4 days 
My missus must be preying for a win tonight and a couple of goals 

[Anfield rapper]

I think that this is the more truthful problem people have with rotation. Its not the rotation of the squad per say, but the rotation (out) of Torres that people have a problem with.

Its obvious that a kid who has never played in this league, and never played two or three times a week in a less physical league would have not only made all the difference to our team, he would have been able to handle the pressure. ITs obvious isnt it ?

No its not.

But he never needed to mate, he should of played the game against Portsmouth sat out the Porto game (to show where our priorities lie) played the Birmingham game, thats not even two games in a week never mind three.

I know by the thread you started after the Porto game that you think that selecting a stronger line up for that was better than doing so for the Portsmouth game but again we will agree to disagree on that. I think the priority is the league, and that we would be strong enough to go through in the Champions league even if we had lost to Porto.

I agree with this. Gerrard and Torres should have started against Portsmouth. If Rafa wanted to rest them, then the Porto match was the time to do it. Even if we lost we would still make it out of the group. It doesn't really matter who wins the groups in the CL because the vast majority of teams that make it through are all going to be tough games anyway. Then against Birmingham he would be able to field his strongest team again. All we needed against Birmingham was one goal and it would have been game over and Torres could have been replaced whether he had scored it or not.

Tell me how it is possibly easier to make up a 3 point defecit over 5 games than it is to make it up over 35 games ?

Like i said we only need to finish in the top two. A loss against Porto would be dissapointing but they still have to play at Anfield. It would not have been the end of the world. In the league though its all about finishing top and if we don't play our best players we are handicapping ourselves before the whistle has even been blown.

[LittleHobo]

match winners win matches....the others help along the way

liverpool match winners....gerrard, torres

arsenals match winners....van pezzy, fabergas

man utd....rooney, ronaldo

chelsea....drogba, fat frank

these players play pretty much every premiership game unless injured..apart from us, our 2 play like 70%