Liverpool FC Forum

you missed out the season we won 5 tropheys

Thommo's perm » Wed Nov 07, 2012 8:58 am wrote:What are your expectations based on? I too have had the "rose tinted glasses" syndrome, but Ive took mine off.
We havent won the league in over two decades and have only looked like seriously competing for it once, maybe twice in all this time. It took a miracle to win the CL, and we duly fu'cked it up in 2007 when it was easier to win the thing. We scraped through to win an FA cup in 2006 on penalties and did the same for the league cup last season. Im sorry to be the bearer of bad news but we aint the force we were in the late 80's and only hard work and full support from owners and fans will get us through and hopefully turn us into contenders again.
I an constantly being called deluded by bitter tw@ts, which I laugh off by calling them jealous. But secretly, deep down I wonder if I, and other Reds really are...?

I expect to challange for 4th. How newcastle got above us is a shambles. Under Rafa the sky was the limit.

I guess im starting to get ***** at the defeatest stance Brod is taking, with all the excuses that follow. I wonder how that makes to team feel?

I know how it makes me feel.

you sensitive little sausage you

ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:49 pm wrote:i compared him to houllier in the sense that he waffles, remember houlliers classics like we are ten games away from greatness, cheyrou is the new zidane, we have turned a corner etc? 
listening to rodgers boldly proclaim one minute that `the title challenge starts here` and then hear him say the next minute `it`s going to take 4 years to even challenge for a top 4 place` reminds me of the stuff houllier used to come up with.
they are poles apart in terms of philosophy and rodgers teams are a lot better to watch than houlliers i`m not denying that.
although to be fair to houllier (and i wasnt his biggest fan) he did win the F.A cup, 2 league cups, the uefa cup, european super cup and even managed to finish second in the league one year.
people forget that we had to beat some good sides to win that uefa cup as well.
we beat capello`s roma who were top of the italian league at the time with players like cafu, battistuta, montella, emerson, tommasi, samuel etc in their line up and we also beat barcelona as well with pepe reina in goal and the likes of rivaldo, guardiola, puyol, overmars, de boer, cocu, kluivert in their starting XI and xavi on the bench.
infact in the 5 years houllier was in sole charge we finished 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 5th then 4th, which by the standard of the last few years is quite good!
plus he did sign some good players ( hyypia, hamaan, riise, anelka, litmanen etc) and brought through the likes of gerrard and carragher.
people are proclaiming rodgers a genuis already and he has got miles to go before he even matches someone like houlliers record, and ged isnt really remembered as one of our greats but his record is respectable.
rodgers has done nothing in the game.

I think its time we stopped comparing him with past managers ,yes Houllier was successful ,likewise Benitez ,although they did have a hell of a lot more
big game experience  than Rodgers ....I mean Houllier was  manager of the French National team ,he also managed Lens and Paris St Germain before he came to manage the redmen, so plenty of experience in winning trophies ...Then we have Benitez who won two La Liga titles with Valencia and broke the stranglehold of Real Madrid and Barcelona  ..... Comparing any of these managers with a comparatively new and innovative young manager can only be deemed ridiculous .



Its obvious you find Rodgers candid approach to management disconcerting ,but to continually disparage the man's demeanour because he (in your opinion)
resembles the sometimes resentfully affable French gentleman is a tad unfair mate ..... BTW I actually liked Houllier and he will always be an endearing
memory ,but lets not forget Roy Evans left him a decent squad of players to fine tune ... Also both managers had ample funds when they first took the
reins at Liverpool .

Anyway Ive said my piece mate ,I have no intention of becoming embroiled in a debate that is quite clearly unfairly balanced in favour of the ghosts of this
glorious clubs illustrious past .

BTW I actually liked Houllier and he will always be an endearing memory 

I agree. The thing that gets me is, not only are our manager's personalities scrutinised but so to their footballing philosophies. Houllier's philosophy was very pragmatic as you said we were by and large a counter attacking outfit, yet he did get results and trophies to boot - that treble season under him was a fantastic achievement and easily one of the best seasons we've had since the turn of the century.

Now it's Rodgers' turn at being moaned about. Okay I agree to an extent with ygycgdyycygasyy in the way that I feel Rodgers is too open and does like talking to the cameras a lot. That's going to be one of his smaller downfalls because people like yyydcyydcdycycy will pick up every supposed contradiction or Freudian slip and bemoan it. But he's also having his footballing tactics scrutinised, under Houllier we were a counter attacking outfit and I'd bet my fecking mortgage that people bemoaned his tactics at times, especially,  if results didn't go our way, sh.it I probably had a whinge too. But now Rodgers is being moaned about as having no plan B (see Everton for that myth to be debunked) when things aren't going well playing 'nice' football. Arsenal has very similar problems with this tippy-tappy football too but I think it's a philosophy that should 90% of the time get you results, FWIW there aren't too many games this season in which I believe the philosophy/tactic needed changing to counter the opposition, Everton was the only one and Rodgers dealt with that as best he could and it worked regardless of all the other variables like Miralis going off.

I think his philosophy is good and he should persist with it. The one thing I will say is, second half against Newcastle reminded me very much like last seasons showing. Huffing and puffing away against two banks of four without really threatening their goal, our build up play and tempo IMO was to slow at times and we started to look devoid of ideas. I hope to God this doesn't become another regular norm at Anfield, although I think in an attacking/coaching sense and patterns of play sense, Rodgers has a little bit more up his sleeve than say Kenny or even, dare I say Rafa did with this aspect of the game, because his principles are more in sync to having an attacking philosophy, therefore he should have better ideas to implement this>?. Until we get quality attacking players into the side which in fairness are going to be a vital principle to this (to any footballing philosophy in fact) philosophy of Rodger's i do think it's unfair to slate him off when things don't go too well, his philosophy relies on good attackers, he doesn't have them at his disposal so again I reiterate that it's unfair to critisise  him so heavily for this.

Just to go back to Rodgers and his media relationships and that American viewing doco which I know isn't/wasn't his idea. Regarding these matters my personal feeling is that the club in this time of transition should quarantine itself from as much media attention as it can. For me, we should be in a phase where our heads should be down and our bums should be up, we don't need such media attention - brief pre/post match comments should be about it, oh and as well as defending our players. Anything other than that is a distraction and while we're in a transitional period we are open slather to critics, which at this point in time we shouldn't be giving them ammunition.

Good post KK.

Can anyone explain why Gerrard isn't being played in a more attacking role?

fivecups » Wed Nov 07, 2012 10:03 pm wrote:Good post KK.

Can anyone explain why Gerrard isn't being played in a more attacking role?

I'm not sure.

Perhaps, because the likes of Suso and Sterling are still required to track back and defend then burst forward and change the game up the other end, I'd doubt Gerrard has the legs for that.

He IMO though should be playing in the Sahin/Shelvey role more, the most advanced of our trio of midfielders, I don't really get why Sahin is there, he'd do a job alongside Allen. Again, perhaps its the case of not having the legs, he still needs to get back and do his bit defensively.

Your guess is as good as mine.

Kenny Kan » Wed Nov 07, 2012 9:38 pm wrote:

BTW I actually liked Houllier and he will always be an endearing memory 

I agree. The thing that gets me is, not only are our manager's personalities scrutinised but so to their footballing philosophies. Houllier's philosophy was very pragmatic as you said we were by and large a counter attacking outfit, yet he did get results and trophies to boot - that treble season under him was a fantastic achievement and easily one of the best seasons we've had since the turn of the century.

Now it's Rodgers' turn at being moaned about. Okay I agree to an extent with ygycgdyycygasyy in the way that I feel Rodgers is too open and does like talking to the cameras a lot. That's going to be one of his smaller downfalls because people like yyydcyydcdycycy will pick up every supposed contradiction or Freudian slip and bemoan it. But he's also having his footballing tactics scrutinised, under Houllier we were a counter attacking outfit and I'd bet my fecking mortgage that people bemoaned his tactics at times, especially,  if results didn't go our way, sh.it I probably had a whinge too. But now Rodgers is being moaned about as having no plan B (see Everton for that myth to be debunked) when things aren't going well playing 'nice' football. Arsenal has very similar problems with this tippy-tappy football too but I think it's a philosophy that should 90% of the time get you results, FWIW there aren't too many games this season in which I believe the philosophy/tactic needed changing to counter the opposition, Everton was the only one and Rodgers dealt with that as best he could and it worked regardless of all the other variables like Miralis going off.

I think his philosophy is good and he should persist with it. The one thing I will say is, second half against Newcastle reminded me very much like last seasons showing. Huffing and puffing away against two banks of four without really threatening their goal, our build up play and tempo IMO was to slow at times and we started to look devoid of ideas. I hope to God this doesn't become another regular norm at Anfield, although I think in an attacking/coaching sense and patterns of play sense, Rodgers has a little bit more up his sleeve than say Kenny or even, dare I say Rafa did with this aspect of the game, because his principles are more in sync to having an attacking philosophy, therefore he should have better ideas to implement this>?. Until we get quality attacking players into the side which in fairness are going to be a vital principle to this (to any footballing philosophy in fact) philosophy of Rodger's i do think it's unfair to slate him off when things don't go too well, his philosophy relies on good attackers, he doesn't have them at his disposal so again I reiterate that it's unfair to critisise  him so heavily for this.

Just to go back to Rodgers and his media relationships and that American viewing doco which I know isn't/wasn't his idea. Regarding these matters my personal feeling is that the club in this time of transition should quarantine itself from as much media attention as it can. For me, we should be in a phase where our heads should be down and our bums should be up, we don't need such media attention - brief pre/post match comments should be about it, oh and as well as defending our players. Anything other than that is a distraction and while we're in a transitional period we are open slather to critics, which at this point in time we shouldn't be giving them ammunition.

Well considering the dearth of optimism amongst the posters on this forum lately .......its a good post Bam.

Kenny Kan » Wed Nov 07, 2012 9:38 pm wrote:

BTW I actually liked Houllier and he will always be an endearing memory 

I agree. The thing that gets me is, not only are our manager's personalities scrutinised but so to their footballing philosophies. Houllier's philosophy was very pragmatic as you said we were by and large a counter attacking outfit, yet he did get results and trophies to boot - that treble season under him was a fantastic achievement and easily one of the best seasons we've had since the turn of the century.

Now it's Rodgers' turn at being moaned about. Okay I agree to an extent with ygycgdyycygasyy in the way that I feel Rodgers is too open and does like talking to the cameras a lot. That's going to be one of his smaller downfalls because people like yyydcyydcdycycy will pick up every supposed contradiction or Freudian slip and bemoan it. But he's also having his footballing tactics scrutinised, under Houllier we were a counter attacking outfit and I'd bet my fecking mortgage that people bemoaned his tactics at times, especially,  if results didn't go our way, sh.it I probably had a whinge too. But now Rodgers is being moaned about as having no plan B (see Everton for that myth to be debunked) when things aren't going well playing 'nice' football. Arsenal has very similar problems with this tippy-tappy football too but I think it's a philosophy that should 90% of the time get you results, FWIW there aren't too many games this season in which I believe the philosophy/tactic needed changing to counter the opposition, Everton was the only one and Rodgers dealt with that as best he could and it worked regardless of all the other variables like Miralis going off.

I think his philosophy is good and he should persist with it. The one thing I will say is, second half against Newcastle reminded me very much like last seasons showing. Huffing and puffing away against two banks of four without really threatening their goal, our build up play and tempo IMO was to slow at times and we started to look devoid of ideas. I hope to God this doesn't become another regular norm at Anfield, although I think in an attacking/coaching sense and patterns of play sense, Rodgers has a little bit more up his sleeve than say Kenny or even, dare I say Rafa did with this aspect of the game, because his principles are more in sync to having an attacking philosophy, therefore he should have better ideas to implement this>?. Until we get quality attacking players into the side which in fairness are going to be a vital principle to this (to any footballing philosophy in fact) philosophy of Rodger's i do think it's unfair to slate him off when things don't go too well, his philosophy relies on good attackers, he doesn't have them at his disposal so again I reiterate that it's unfair to critisise  him so heavily for this.

Just to go back to Rodgers and his media relationships and that American viewing doco which I know isn't/wasn't his idea. Regarding these matters my personal feeling is that the club in this time of transition should quarantine itself from as much media attention as it can. For me, we should be in a phase where our heads should be down and our bums should be up, we don't need such media attention - brief pre/post match comments should be about it, oh and as well as defending our players. Anything other than that is a distraction and while we're in a transitional period we are open slather to critics, which at this point in time we shouldn't be giving them ammunition.

Great post mate,

You got it right about the attacking talent

RED BEERGOGGLES » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:23 pm wrote:
Well guess what ? If the game against the Bitters doesn't prove how innovative a manager Rodgers is,then I fail to see a clearer example occurring this season.

I was completely lost for an explanation when he made those substitutions ,but then again I don't aspire to management ,but still the substitutions came early
and completely altered the course of that game .

Mate, I was absolutely speechless when Rodgers made those subsitutions, even questioned him, but that was good and it shows this ''No Plan B'' that's being branded out is mumbo jumbo.

I'm giving him time, I think he is the right choice if FSG back him the right way

 
I'm giving him time, I think he is the right choice if FSG back him the right way

And that's the thing MH, if our owners back him. If they don't we'll never know if he's truly the right choice.

For me, FSG are analogous to Brad Jones, overall they're steady but you just know there is a blunder in there somewhere waiting to pop out - another transfer window no doubt.

Kenny Kan » Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:28 pm wrote:

 
I'm giving him time, I think he is the right choice if FSG back him the right way

And that's the thing MH, if our owners back him. If they don't we'll never know if he's truly the right choice.

For me, FSG are analogous to Brad Jones, overall they're steady but you just know there is a blunder in there somewhere waiting to pop out - another transfer window no doubt.

The problem is mate, who will be the right choice if the owners don't back their own appointment? Even Benitez needed financial backing, Mourinho as well. Without trust from your employers you are left with nothing!

at the end of last season it was obvious to everyone in football what we were lacking. everyone could see we needed a clinical goalscorer to put away all those chances that we were missing.
we hit the woodwork 30 odd times and probably saw a similar amount of good chances put wide or over the bar, if half of those would have went in we`d probably be in the CL now.
kenny was probably a huntelaar and joe allen away from a very good side, dont forget if he had stayed he would have had sterling and suso coming through as well. he was already playing sterling.
in the summer the owners gave rodgers £30m to spend but he somehow failed to address the obvious problem, and now that problem has carried over into this season and its costing us big time.
january is huge for this club, rodgers cant afford to take his eye of the ball again, he has got to bring in players that will give us a cutting edge in the final third.
wether he knows how to do this is another question, even at swansea it was the one thing he got criticised for, swansea were one of the lowest scorers in the league.

ycsatbjywtbiastkamb » Thu Nov 08, 2012 10:41 pm wrote:at the end of last season it was obvious to everyone in football what we were lacking. everyone could see we needed a clinical goalscorer to put away all those chances that we were missing.

are you sure?    you were advocating using Carroll more often FFS. Majority on here were on Carroll bandwagon after he played 2-3 good games out of like 70 and after he had that single good header on international duty. I was one of the few who was asking the club to buy a striker... you lot were like "nooo... we have Carroll"...

BR shipped out Carroll (rightly so... he hasn't exactly set the PL alight with his new team and still is injury prone)... he brought in a young decent striker in Borini... and he was let down by the owners in bringing in Dempsey who can contribute straight away to the team with more goals and build up play than Carroll ever could...

funny you mention Kenny Dalglish being a Joe Allen and a striker away from a good side. If I remember rightly you were originally bemoaning Joe Allen as a player and insinuating how he wasn't good enough. With that said, Rodgers was also a Joe Allen and a striker away from making a good side - except you forgot to mention that it WAS Rodgers  who signed Allen and signed him out of the 30M budget, leaving 15M. He signed Borini and Assaidi too, one for 8 and 3M. The Borini signing hasn't paid off yet but that doesn't mean it won't either, in the long run. Borini could have hit the ground running and scoring goals for fun which would of helped no end, but he hsan't and now he's injured. You can also sign, cultured class midfielders like Sahin but again he hasn't been as prominent as would have been expected knowing what his form can be. So, for 15M Rodgers may have bought a 'more' marquee signing of a striker but as Sahin has shown your still not guaranteed great form. Had Rodgers had a real war chest to spend I would be more inclined to agree with the notions of not bringing in a good striker or two was his feck-up, that said, (again) the owners need to back him financially.