Liverpool FC Forum

[Bam]

PS, Mick I know you didnt ask me, but thought I'd give you my opinion.

No, thanks mate. It's certainly interesting that we can go from looking so porous in midweek to really getting it sorted against a good side.

IMO its probably down to the preperations in training days before the game. Where if we go down to a place such as Stamford Bridge, we know its going to be tough. The team looked as though they expected it they looked organise and every player looked as though he had his defensive brain drilled into him. where as maybe against Wigan the training may not of been so intent on defending and prepping the teams tactics in that way. Probably more to do with 'how we're going to break down a Wigan side'. Incidenally Wigan did shock us somewhat by coming to Anfield and playing a pretty open game, for  Steve Bruce anyway .

Yesterday it was like a role reversal imo, where we'd gone down there and our priority was not to conceed. We didnt, and we did look organised.

As I also said Chelsea didnt offer us to much to worry about either, they were imo pretty s.*i*e of which I'm glad about obviously.

[stmichael]

Just a word for Carragher here. Absolutely immense and wouldn't swap him for anybody else in the world.

[Bad Bob]

Sabes I've still only seen brief highlights of the game, but from what I've read on here despite having plenty of possession we limited them to one shot on goal. Curiously, I've also seen a couple of posters saying it wasn't down to aurelio who was disappointing, so what was the difference? Is it simply thaT Carragher and Agger played well (and like you I've always had high hopes for Agger), or is there more to it?

I thought we defended terribly in the second half against Athletico, so what did we do better this time?

I thought Aurelio was every bit as solid as our other defenders, mate.  He pushed out well enough on occasion to contain Bosingwa (Kalou was no threat down that flank) but he spent most of the match tucked in, making sure Deco didn't have clear passing lanes to pick out runs into the box.

[Sabre]

Sabes I've still only seen brief highlights of the game, but from what I've read on here despite having plenty of possession we limited them to one shot on goal. Curiously, I've also seen a couple of posters saying it wasn't down to aurelio who was disappointing, so what was the difference? Is it simply thaT Carragher and Agger played well (and like you I've always had high hopes for Agger), or is there more to it?

I thought we defended terribly in the second half against Athletico, so what did we do better this time?

I thought Aurelio was every bit as solid as our other defenders, mate.  He pushed out well enough on occasion to contain Bosingwa (Kalou was no threat down that flank) but he spent most of the match tucked in, making sure Deco didn't have clear passing lanes to pick out runs into the box.

There was a situation in the first half that was interesting.

We recovered the ball thanks to Masch, then Gerrard got the ball in our own half near the middle of the pitch, and made signs to Aurelio to run his wing and mount the counter attack.

You could see Aurelio hesitating but eventually ran the wing but with no conviction, the ball ended up in a throw in against us.

There were a couple of situations like that and I think Aurelio had instructions to be cautious yesterday.

What Andy G says about us forcing them to use the wings is true. It's the perfect example of not being a problem to have less posession than the opposition AS LONG AS the ball is touched by those opposition players you wish. Chelsea had a lot of the ball yes, but with the likes of Boitinga (sp?) which made them not dangerous.

[Bad Bob]

Sabes I've still only seen brief highlights of the game, but from what I've read on here despite having plenty of possession we limited them to one shot on goal. Curiously, I've also seen a couple of posters saying it wasn't down to aurelio who was disappointing, so what was the difference? Is it simply thaT Carragher and Agger played well (and like you I've always had high hopes for Agger), or is there more to it?

I thought we defended terribly in the second half against Athletico, so what did we do better this time?

I thought Aurelio was every bit as solid as our other defenders, mate.  He pushed out well enough on occasion to contain Bosingwa (Kalou was no threat down that flank) but he spent most of the match tucked in, making sure Deco didn't have clear passing lanes to pick out runs into the box.

There was a situation in the first half that was interesting.

We recovered the ball thanks to Masch, the Gerrard got the ball in the middle and made signs to Aurelio to run his wing and mount the counter attack.

You could see Aurelio hesitating but eventually ran the wing but with no conviction, the ball ended up in a throw in against us.

There were a couple of situations like that and I think Aurelio had instructions to be cautious yesterday.

What Andy G says about us forcing them to use the wings is true. It's the perfect example of not being a problems to have less posession than the opposition AS LONG AS the ball is touched by those opposition players you wish. Chelsea had a lot of the ball yes, but with the likes of Boitinga (sp?) which made them not dangerous.

Noticed that too, mate, and my match commentators picked up on the fact that their fullbacks were raiding forward whereas ours were playing it cautious.  Too right, we were up a goal at Stamford Bridge against a top team...no call for swashbuckling rampages forward! 

[Bam]

Sabes I've still only seen brief highlights of the game, but from what I've read on here despite having plenty of possession we limited them to one shot on goal. Curiously, I've also seen a couple of posters saying it wasn't down to aurelio who was disappointing, so what was the difference? Is it simply thaT Carragher and Agger played well (and like you I've always had high hopes for Agger), or is there more to it?

I thought we defended terribly in the second half against Athletico, so what did we do better this time?

I thought Aurelio was every bit as solid as our other defenders, mate.  He pushed out well enough on occasion to contain Bosingwa (Kalou was no threat down that flank) but he spent most of the match tucked in, making sure Deco didn't have clear passing lanes to pick out runs into the box.

There was a situation in the first half that was interesting.

We recovered the ball thanks to Masch, the Gerrard got the ball in the middle and made signs to Aurelio to run his wing and mount the counter attack.

You could see Aurelio hesitating but eventually ran the wing but with no conviction, the ball ended up in a throw in against us.

There were a couple of situations like that and I think Aurelio had instructions to be cautious yesterday.

What Andy G says about us forcing them to use the wings is true. It's the perfect example of not being a problems to have less posession than the opposition AS LONG AS the ball is touched by those opposition players you wish. Chelsea had a lot of the ball yes, but with the likes of Boitinga (sp?) which made them not dangerous.

Noticed that too, mate, and my match commentators picked up on the fact that their fullbacks were raiding forward whereas ours were playing it cautious.  Too right, we were up a goal at Stamford Bridge against a top team...no call for swashbuckling rampages forward! 

Yeah, that was David Pleat who said that and it was a valid point.

[Bam]

Sabes I've still only seen brief highlights of the game, but from what I've read on here despite having plenty of possession we limited them to one shot on goal. Curiously, I've also seen a couple of posters saying it wasn't down to aurelio who was disappointing, so what was the difference? Is it simply thaT Carragher and Agger played well (and like you I've always had high hopes for Agger), or is there more to it?

I thought we defended terribly in the second half against Athletico, so what did we do better this time?

I thought Aurelio was every bit as solid as our other defenders, mate.  He pushed out well enough on occasion to contain Bosingwa (Kalou was no threat down that flank) but he spent most of the match tucked in, making sure Deco didn't have clear passing lanes to pick out runs into the box.

There was a situation in the first half that was interesting.

We recovered the ball thanks to Masch, the Gerrard got the ball in the middle and made signs to Aurelio to run his wing and mount the counter attack.

You could see Aurelio hesitating but eventually ran the wing but with no conviction, the ball ended up in a throw in against us.

There were a couple of situations like that and I think Aurelio had instructions to be cautious yesterday.

What Andy G says about us forcing them to use the wings is true. It's the perfect example of not being a problems to have less posession than the opposition AS LONG AS the ball is touched by those opposition players you wish. Chelsea had a lot of the ball yes, but with the likes of Boitinga (sp?) which made them not dangerous.

Noticed that too, mate, and my match commentators picked up on the fact that their fullbacks were raiding forward whereas ours were playing it cautious.  Too right, we were up a goal at Stamford Bridge against a top team...no call for swashbuckling rampages forward! 

Yeah, that was David Pleat who said that and it was a valid point.