The Liverpool FC Thread XII

Scroll to see replies

Reply 5220

Mackay

Kolo lost Benzema for the goal.

Reply 5221

Rk2k14

Toure was your best defender, arguably Moreno.
Considering he hasn't played as much this season he did pretty well.

Reply 5222

WeOnlyLiveOnce

Its criminal how you guys decided to splash out 20m on Lovren when you had Kolo :colone:

LOL

Reply 5223

Zerforax

Perhaps Mourinho should've played his first team last night..?

Reply 5224

doobucks

Original post by Mackay

Kolo lost Benzema for the goal.

But the initial problem was Manquillo allowing Marcelo that time and space second that happens then your defence is going to get exposed if Benzema went far post or near due to Marcelos crossing ability.

Reply 5225

Bubzeh

Original post by Mackay

Kolo lost Benzema for the goal.

I also thought this but what do I know, Jam is the master of the TSR Footballing Community.

Reply 5226

Lyrical Prodigy

Original post by Rk2k14

Seems like something United would do, *cough Leicester :colone:

The things I would do just to see that happen to United again! :tongue:

Reply 5227

Lúcio

Original post by samir12

If he starts Balotelli upfront alone, then we have no chance of getting something from the game.

The sad thing is that I can't put it past him.
I can only see Balotelli starting on Saturday since BR didn't use him at all against Madrid.

All we can hope is that he decides to tweak the formation and play a front two, which I doubt he will... :/

Reply 5228

Rk2k14

Original post by Lyrical Prodigy

The things I would do just to see that happen to United again! :tongue:

Be careful what you say :colone:

. It could happen to you :tongue:

Reply 5229

Rk2k14

Feel sorry for poor, old Lambert.

Reply 5230

Zerforax

Original post by Rk2k14

Feel sorry for poor, old Lambert.

He knew what he was signing up for.

Original post by Lúcio

Don't understand the obsession with playing with 2 up front. You lose more control of the game and expose your defence more. Having two crap strikers isn't going to add value.

Reply 5231

Lyrical Prodigy

Original post by Rk2k14

Be careful what you say :colone:

. It could happen to you :tongue:

God forbid :colonhash:

Reply 5232

doobucks

Original post by Zerforax

Perhaps Mourinho should've played his first team last night..?

We did but we were underdogs playing against 15 men on the pitch.

Reply 5233

A Mysterious Lord

Original post by Zerforax

Don't understand the obsession with playing with 2 up front. You lose more control of the game and expose your defence more. Having two crap strikers isn't going to add value.

They end up isolated in double/triple coverage - if you can't move the ball forwards, you can't score goals.

Reply 5234

Lúcio

Original post by Zerforax

Don't understand the obsession with playing with 2 up front. You lose more control of the game and expose your defence more. Having two crap strikers isn't going to add value.

i disagree.

how easy is it for defenders to just makr balotelli out of the game - there's just one of him so it's easy.
the fact is that if we had another striker, we'd likely be better in the opponents half
whenever we're attacking we're stopping the opponents from doing so.

hoofing the ball up to balotelli isn't gonna do anything, just means the other team can gain possession and go on another attack.
it isn't quite as simple as that but it's clear a sole striker up top is not working; why not at least try something different?

Reply 5235

Rk2k14

Original post by Zerforax

He knew what he was signing up for.

Don't understand the obsession with playing with 2 up front. You lose more control of the game and expose your defence more. Having two crap strikers isn't going to add value.

You might expose your own defence more, but with another striker you will also expose the oppositions defence more.

Reply 5236

Zerforax

Original post by Lúcio

Well that just means we need more vertical runners. I do wonder if Henderson should play AM instead? If we have 2 strikers and neither hold the ball up well, then we've got two passengers in the side instead of another passer in the side.

Ever wondered why very few teams now play with 2 out and out strikers?

Original post by Rk2k14

You might expose your own defence more, but with another striker you will also expose the oppositions defence more.

Our defence is bad enough, should we be exposing it anymore?

Reply 5237

Mackay

A sole striker would work if it was Sturridge. It doesn't work if it isn't.

Reply 5238

Lúcio

Original post by Zerforax

i agree; runners is what we need.
we can bitch all about how bad balotelli's finishing has been but in general we just aren't creating enough chances.

just because few teams play with 2 strikers, doesn't mean we can't.
with sturridge we're fine playing one striker but we just don't have the back-up quality to play the same system when our first choice is out.
that isn't all of the problems we have, but if we created more chances and spent more time in the opposition half, there would be so much less pressure on our defence and an overall higher level of morale in the side.

if rodgers plays a lone striker tomorrow, i guarantee we will be brushed aside without chelsea even playing at full force.

Original post by Mackay

A sole striker would work if it was Sturridge. It doesn't work if it isn't.

thats exactly how i feel - rodgers isn't changing the system even though the replacement strikers just aren't as capable as him.
sturridge can make space for himself, beat players, score some excellent goals and make some awesome runs.
balotelli is too immobile, borini is a handful on his day but just lacks the general level of quality needed, and lambert is a totally different type of player.