Page 4 of 5
Posted:
Wed Oct 22, 2008 10:06 pmby bigmick
Just a quick re-visitation here after tonights performance. Given the fact we played 4-5-1 I thought the defence was awful and it's starting to give me real concerns. We conceded a goal early on in the second half which was wrongly disallowed, we had Simao hit the foot of the post and eventually score a goal, as well as one or two near misses. I really do believe that we have real problems at the back, and sooner or later we're going to come unstck big style.
The goal was an interesting one. Carragher lets it bounce which was a mistake but I have two questions. Firstly, where was Agger. I couldn't see him anywhere in the shot on my telly, and if it's the case that he's gone marauding forward when we are 1-0 up with 7 minutes to go, he wants his erse kicking. Second question, Carragher let it bounce, which conceded posession to Forlan. It wasn't though a goalscoring opportunity, he was 30 yards out from goal. What the feck was Arbeloa doing then sprinting accross and leaving his man? I like Arby, like Carra and like Agger but FFS what goes on there? Some of the frailty could probably be explained by Benayoun rather than Kuyt playing on the right, but I remain extremely unconvinced about our defensive efforts right now.
We could quite easily have lost a game which we dominated and simply must do better, sharpish.
Posted:
Wed Oct 22, 2008 10:11 pmby Cool Hand Luke
bigmick wrote:Just a quick re-visitation here after tonights performance. Given the fact we played 4-5-1 I thought the defence was awful and it's starting to give me real concerns. We conceded a goal early on in the second half which was wrongly disallowed, we had Simao hit the foot of the post and eventually score a goal, as well as one or two near misses. I really do believe that we have real problems at the back, and sooner or later we're going to come unstck big style.
The goal was an interesting one. Carragher lets it bounce which was a mistake but I have two questions. Firstly, where was Agger. I couldn't see him anywhere in the shot on my telly, and if it's the case that he's gone marauding forward when we are 1-0 up with 7 minutes to go, he wants his erse kicking. Second question, Carragher let it bounce, which conceded posession to Forlan. It wasn't though a goalscoring opportunity, he was 30 yards out from goal. What the feck was Arbeloa doing then sprinting accross and leaving his man? I like Arby, like Carra and like Agger but FFS what goes on there? Some of the frailty could probably be explained by Benayoun rather than Kuyt playing on the right, but I remain extremely unconvinced about our defensive efforts right now.
We could quite easily have lost a game which we dominated and simply must do better, sharpish.
And where the fu(k was Dossena?
Posted:
Wed Oct 22, 2008 10:13 pmby Sabre
would you separate the first and the second half or were unhappy to at half time in that front?
Because at halftime I was very happy about how we defended as a team, reminded me the most rigurous and serious version of Liverpool defending.
In the second half though...
Posted:
Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:06 pmby LFC2007
First half, I think they had one shot on goal - Forlan's which went wide and wasn't much of an opportunity anyway. We looked extremely comfortable all over the pitch and dominated, their pressing was non-existent. Second half, we tired and got in something of a comfort zone because of the experience in the first half, they put two up top and we lost our shape and couldn't hold the ball up field. They consequently applied pressure and scored a goal at a time when the game was sretched.
On the issue of the equaliser itself, I'd have to see it again to be sure but I thought Arbeloa was correct to cover Carragher, I think Simao made the run from deep just after Arbeloa moved in to cover him, it was just unfortunate that there was abolsutely noone else covering or tracking back. That was the questionable part of it for me. Why, when we're 1-0 up after 82 minutes, did we have just two at the back? As I said, I think we simply fell into a comfort zone after entirely dominating first half.
Posted:
Thu Oct 23, 2008 5:37 pmby JoeTerp
but we had been threatened many times before that equalizer, we had no right to still be in a comfort zone, especially only up by a goal. Maybe Rafa should have subbed on Darby or Hyypia instead of Lucas or Babel, but I would have opted of taking off Yossi. But it seems that Rafa's hand was forced with knocks and fatigue.
Posted:
Thu Oct 23, 2008 5:45 pmby Bad Bob
JoeTerp wrote:but we had been threatened many times before that equalizer, we had no right to still be in a comfort zone, especially only up by a goal. Maybe Rafa should have subbed on Darby or Hyypia instead of Lucas or Babel, but I would have opted of taking off Yossi. But it seems that Rafa's hand was forced with knocks and fatigue.
Hyypia's not available in the CL, mate.
Posted:
Thu Oct 23, 2008 5:57 pmby JoeTerp
Bad Bob wrote:JoeTerp wrote:but we had been threatened many times before that equalizer, we had no right to still be in a comfort zone, especially only up by a goal. Maybe Rafa should have subbed on Darby or Hyypia instead of Lucas or Babel, but I would have opted of taking off Yossi. But it seems that Rafa's hand was forced with knocks and fatigue.
Hyypia's not available in the CL, mate.
I knew that too, I guess Aurelio was the only other defensive player on the bench. Rafa should have brough Kelly instead of Darby, I guess he was planning on moving Arbeloa to CB if one of Carra or Agger went down.
I was thinking of Hyypia because I watched the first half of the Wigan match on DVR last night and after Agger's mistake the camera panned to Hyypia.
Posted:
Fri Oct 24, 2008 1:14 pmby Owzat
Bad Bob wrote:JoeTerp wrote:but we had been threatened many times before that equalizer, we had no right to still be in a comfort zone, especially only up by a goal. Maybe Rafa should have subbed on Darby or Hyypia instead of Lucas or Babel, but I would have opted of taking off Yossi. But it seems that Rafa's hand was forced with knocks and fatigue.
Hyypia's not available in the CL, mate.
Even more the reason to have subbed him! 
Posted:
Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:29 amby Sabre
A few weeks back we were worried with the defence, but such is football, lesser teams make you two goals, and then you face probably the toughest test and our lads got a clean sheet 
In was especially happy for Agger, because I really have a soft spot for this lad's game. I think in the back four it's important to play the same players often because otherwise it's difficult to get right the synchornisation required to leave opposition players off side. Agger just needs matches, last season was a hell for him, but 2 years ago Carra and him proved to be very solid.
May this solidness continue
Posted:
Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:34 amby bigmick
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?
Posted:
Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:35 amby Bam
Bam wrote:Well I'm going to go with the notion, that for now our goals conceeded have come by silly individual errors in the main. So I'm not going to worry to much about this TBH, every year we conceed a few more goals somewhere along the line during a season. In the past they've been nipped in the bud, like somebody else mentioned we only conceeded two goals prior to the Man.C game in the league. So I'm pretty confident there isnt too much to worry about, like I said its not as if teams are ripping us apart at every given opportunity. That would have me concerned but not this, not yet.
Trumpets and blown, spring to mind.
Posted:
Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:40 amby Bam
bigmick wrote: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?
The back four as a unit Mick were sound and organised, that includes Aurelio obviously. They looked much better prepared for this one, as inevitably Chelsea would ask us more questions than the likes of Wigan. With the extra man in midfield we did look a very solid unit, as you'd expect. Carra and Agger both had exceptionally good games.
In saying that though, it wasnt our most grittiest of defending as it didnt need to be, it wasnt a backs to the wall job. As Chelsea in all honesty were very poor and void of attacking ideas imo. Kalou, Malouda and Anelka went missing for them I thought. If say Drogba had been playing and J.Cole we may of been in for a tougher time. Like I said none of them Lampard included couldnt get any real threat going.
PS, Mick I know you didnt ask me, but thought I'd give you my opinion.
Posted:
Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:52 amby andy_g
i think there were a number of factors contributing to the good defensive performance against chelsea - and one of them is that we spent a lot of time attacking them. other reasons include the fact that mascherano and carragher decided to turn in excellent performances and agger had his best game for us in a while. i thought aurelio and arbeloa also did good if unspectacular jobs as well.
benitez' tactics also had a large bearing on things. he made sure that chelsea would play down our wings and try and cross the ball into an area where anelka's threat could be completely nullified in the air. carragher's and agger's performance made that kind of aerial ball winning a fairly straightforward task.
chelsea did get in amongst us a few times and gave me a few squeaky bum moments but we dealt with them as better than we've dealt wiht just about anyone this season.
Posted:
Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:53 amby Sabre
bigmick wrote: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?
If there's a position in which cohesion is important, that's the back four, so naturally Agger getting matches alongide Carraguer, plus a extra concentration might make the difference. (possibly a telling of from Rafa or Sammy too )
Agger was crucial. The midfield battle would have been stale mate if he wasn't there. When Alonso is watched, Mascherano is watched and there's not a clear pass to Gerrard, Agger appeared running with the ball a la Beckenbauer and that's crucial to unbalance a so leveled game.
Posted:
Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:55 amby bigmick
Bam wrote: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.