everythingisgood
Player Valuation: £1m
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/7240420.stm
better late than never I guess!
better late than never I guess!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The RS finally realise it!
- Thread starter everythingisgood
- Start date
- Status
monty
Sack Sky and donate to GOT...donations are needed
Snippets from the comments page which is mind boggling
an honest asessment from gerrard. liverpool at this moment in time (2005-2008) are always going to be FOURTH favourite to win the title. they will not win it next year but they can make a huge improvement next year and poffer a better challenge. then the following year if they have signed a couple of defenders and another goalscorer and supportsing striker they can win it but only if they cahnge management or ownership becasue the 2 cannot work together. this is a transition period (albeit a very long one). dont balme benitez because he can win the title but he has not got the resources. i admit he too has made mistakes but it is about patience. look at wenger and ferguson.
comment by hesbighesred
posted 26 Minutes Ago
"At the beginning of the season we wanted to win the league. After 10 games it looked unlikely and we were fighting to stay in the champions league. The decision was probably made back then to go for the Champions League (what other team in the world could win 3 games so convincingly after only having 1 point from the first 3)."
Just to point out that Rafael had no choice in this - one of the G£H lies was that Rafael's job was not dependant on Europe and that his record should be 'untouchable' - yet with the whole Klinsmann fiasco Hicks said it was sparked by possible failure to reach the knockout stages - had we gone out Rafael would most likely have been sacked.
As fans, we may want the league to be the priority but the owners don't see it that way. I'd also point out that the abuse Rafael got after playing Leto against Marseille shows that fans also feel that while the league is a priority it is also unacceptable for us to go out of Europe in the group stages. This brings me to:
"I completely agree with Jamie Redknapp's comments this week. Rafael and Liverpool will never win a league title using a squad rotation system.
Look at Arsenal, Chelsea and Man U, providing all players are fit, the starting line-up doesn't vary unless the formation is altered."
But this is just wrong. Firstly, Redknapp was never rotated, and we hardly won anything under Evans. What's his excuse?
Secondly, EVERYONE ROTATES. It's been shown that Fergie makes as many changes per game as Rafael does. Indeed, there are no players who get rotated LESS than Gerrard, Reina and Carra. Torres also starts whenever he's fit.
Moreover, if we wrote off Europe completely, yes, then we could play the same 11 every league match. However, the FACT, and I mean as proven by medical science, is that playing 3 games a week, at top fitness, on a regular basis, is physically impossible.
Furthermore, a 100% fit team, will beat a 75% fit team of 'World Class' players, every time. Not to mention that playing players at less than full fitness dramatically increases the likelihood of serious injury. Just look at how many times Terry has played this season to show the effects of never rotating.
I also remember comments about rotation being made regarding Wenger and Ferguson when they started doing it. Wenger was actually one of the pioneers of rotation - hence why he's always put out weaker sides in the cups.
Finally:
"The Liverpool players can't expect to gel properly and learn eachothers games when they don't play together week in, week out."
While I agree that the intensity is not the same, the players do train together week in week out. Besides, no-one EVER makes the point in reverse:
When we went on that run, culminating in the defeat to West Ham, Rafael hardly changed anything from league game to league game, back to the city match. No-one blamed consistent team selection. Next time he seriously rotated for the Sunderland match, IE making more than one or two changes, and indeed changing the formation with it, we won 3-0.
Indeed, many of our best performances this season have come after many changes (EG Newcastle away), while plenty of poor ones have come after making NO changes (Man U at home).
Why do the anti-rotationers never take this into account? And indeed how do you explain it - it happens regularly so I don't think pure coincidence is the answer...
Indeed statistically, making 4 changes each game produces the most wins IE teams win the highest proportion of games after making 4 changes
# what is this bloke on, Clue blue has turned red
an honest asessment from gerrard. liverpool at this moment in time (2005-2008) are always going to be FOURTH favourite to win the title. they will not win it next year but they can make a huge improvement next year and poffer a better challenge. then the following year if they have signed a couple of defenders and another goalscorer and supportsing striker they can win it but only if they cahnge management or ownership becasue the 2 cannot work together. this is a transition period (albeit a very long one). dont balme benitez because he can win the title but he has not got the resources. i admit he too has made mistakes but it is about patience. look at wenger and ferguson.
comment by hesbighesred
posted 26 Minutes Ago
"At the beginning of the season we wanted to win the league. After 10 games it looked unlikely and we were fighting to stay in the champions league. The decision was probably made back then to go for the Champions League (what other team in the world could win 3 games so convincingly after only having 1 point from the first 3)."
Just to point out that Rafael had no choice in this - one of the G£H lies was that Rafael's job was not dependant on Europe and that his record should be 'untouchable' - yet with the whole Klinsmann fiasco Hicks said it was sparked by possible failure to reach the knockout stages - had we gone out Rafael would most likely have been sacked.
As fans, we may want the league to be the priority but the owners don't see it that way. I'd also point out that the abuse Rafael got after playing Leto against Marseille shows that fans also feel that while the league is a priority it is also unacceptable for us to go out of Europe in the group stages. This brings me to:
"I completely agree with Jamie Redknapp's comments this week. Rafael and Liverpool will never win a league title using a squad rotation system.
Look at Arsenal, Chelsea and Man U, providing all players are fit, the starting line-up doesn't vary unless the formation is altered."
But this is just wrong. Firstly, Redknapp was never rotated, and we hardly won anything under Evans. What's his excuse?
Secondly, EVERYONE ROTATES. It's been shown that Fergie makes as many changes per game as Rafael does. Indeed, there are no players who get rotated LESS than Gerrard, Reina and Carra. Torres also starts whenever he's fit.
Moreover, if we wrote off Europe completely, yes, then we could play the same 11 every league match. However, the FACT, and I mean as proven by medical science, is that playing 3 games a week, at top fitness, on a regular basis, is physically impossible.
Furthermore, a 100% fit team, will beat a 75% fit team of 'World Class' players, every time. Not to mention that playing players at less than full fitness dramatically increases the likelihood of serious injury. Just look at how many times Terry has played this season to show the effects of never rotating.
I also remember comments about rotation being made regarding Wenger and Ferguson when they started doing it. Wenger was actually one of the pioneers of rotation - hence why he's always put out weaker sides in the cups.
Finally:
"The Liverpool players can't expect to gel properly and learn eachothers games when they don't play together week in, week out."
While I agree that the intensity is not the same, the players do train together week in week out. Besides, no-one EVER makes the point in reverse:
When we went on that run, culminating in the defeat to West Ham, Rafael hardly changed anything from league game to league game, back to the city match. No-one blamed consistent team selection. Next time he seriously rotated for the Sunderland match, IE making more than one or two changes, and indeed changing the formation with it, we won 3-0.
Indeed, many of our best performances this season have come after many changes (EG Newcastle away), while plenty of poor ones have come after making NO changes (Man U at home).
Why do the anti-rotationers never take this into account? And indeed how do you explain it - it happens regularly so I don't think pure coincidence is the answer...
Indeed statistically, making 4 changes each game produces the most wins IE teams win the highest proportion of games after making 4 changes
# what is this bloke on, Clue blue has turned red
Rook
Player Valuation: £80m
How can you not look good playing the barcodes?
I still don't understand the whole lets blame the American owners [Poor language removed]. Hell they spent 40M on just 2 players, and sure Klinsmann may be a disaster but at least they wouldn't be playing Rafael's [Poor language removed] on a stick football. Its funny they blame GandH for throwing Rafael under the bus but then they bitch at Rafael for being a crap manager.
I still don't understand the whole lets blame the American owners [Poor language removed]. Hell they spent 40M on just 2 players, and sure Klinsmann may be a disaster but at least they wouldn't be playing Rafael's [Poor language removed] on a stick football. Its funny they blame GandH for throwing Rafael under the bus but then they bitch at Rafael for being a crap manager.
monty
Sack Sky and donate to GOT...donations are needed
- Status