Rev Posted January 29, 2017 Share Posted January 29, 2017 2 hours ago, froggg said: Spot on 1960 against Wolves. You must have dug long and hard to find that out, seeing as he doesn't like to talk about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
froggg Posted January 29, 2017 Share Posted January 29, 2017 1 hour ago, reveldevil said: You must have dug long and hard to find that out, seeing as he doesn't like to talk about it. Google to be sure.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 7 hours ago, Angry Ram said: So they have 3 games in 6 days, so what.. It's okay to throw one then? Make strategic minimal changes maybe.. Southampton got what they deserved as well and good. No I don't know any other team in the country would have done it and neither do you. What was Liverpools best chance of success this season? He already knew he was out of the EFL, top 4? Is that the measure of success now? He has NO European football this season. Yes he should be able to field his strongest team, he potentially now loses 3 in a row mucking about with the team. Way to go Kloppster. They are not tired physically, they are constantly told that they are tired and that affects them mentally. Their training schedule will be very tailored down to accommodate fixtures. What are you talking about - throwing one? Klopp would have analysed the three games in six days and picked the starting XI for each game he deems is good enough to win the match. Or are you suggesting he purposely fielded a side he knew would lose to Wolves? Liverpool lost... So what? On another day they would have won. It's how football works, you win some and you lose some. Liverpool's XI that day was good enough to win, they just didn't... If you don't play your younger players, then they won't improve. It's tough enough as it is for young English talent to break in to the top club's starting XI, so Klopp should be praised for trusting so many at one time. And yes I do know any other team would have made changes. Because it's unrealistic to suggest your best squad of say 14 players can play three games in six days. Chelsea made 9 changes. Were they arrogant? Come on, I want to hear all about how Antonio Conte is arrogant for fielding a weakened side. And throw in Arsenal, Spurs and United too who all made at least 8 changes... Or is it just because Liverpool lost that Klopp is arrogant? Mourinho, Wenger, Conte and Pochettino are all OK because their sides won... On another day they all could have lost. Football for you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MuespachRam Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 3 hours ago, Bris Vegas said: What are you talking about - throwing one? Klopp would have analysed the three games in six days and picked the starting XI for each game he deems is good enough to win the match. Or are you suggesting he purposely fielded a side he knew would lose to Wolves? Liverpool lost... So what? On another day they would have won. It's how football works, you win some and you lose some. Liverpool's XI that day was good enough to win, they just didn't... If you don't play your younger players, then they won't improve. It's tough enough as it is for young English talent to break in to the top club's starting XI, so Klopp should be praised for trusting so many at one time. And yes I do know any other team would have made changes. Because it's unrealistic to suggest your best squad of say 14 players can play three games in six days. Chelsea made 9 changes. Were they arrogant? Come on, I want to hear all about how Antonio Conte is arrogant for fielding a weakened side. And throw in Arsenal, Spurs and United too who all made at least 8 changes... Or is it just because Liverpool lost that Klopp is arrogant? Mourinho, Wenger, Conte and Pochettino are all OK because their sides won... On another day they all could have lost. Football for you... As I said earlier. Klopp messed this all up. He played the weakened team in the wrong game......they have been out of the league for an age, that's where they should be playing the kids.....because obviously playing 3 games in 1 week is too much for anyone..!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimmu Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 8 minutes ago, MuespachRam said: As I said earlier. Klopp messed this all up. He played the weakened team in the wrong game......they have been out of the league for an age, that's where they should be playing the kids.....because obviously playing 3 games in 1 week is too much for anyone..!! Maybe they prefer to get at least Champions league spot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 2 hours ago, MuespachRam said: As I said earlier. Klopp messed this all up. He played the weakened team in the wrong game......they have been out of the league for an age, that's where they should be playing the kids.....because obviously playing 3 games in 1 week is too much for anyone..!! Top four will be their goal, and ultimately I see Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs and City as stronger contenders. I don't see how he messed it up. Conte, Wenger, Pochettino and Mourinho also rested practically their entire strongest XI. Liverpool could have played their best XI and lost anyway. It just happens. As fans we will always treat cup games differently to managers and club staff. Klopp will know that a top four spot benefits them more than winning the FA Cup. It's sad that it's that way, but it's modern day football. Finances dictate. And Liverpool will have a better shot at winning the title over the next few seasons if they finish in the top four this year rather than missing out but winning the FA Cup. Prize money, TV revenue, match-day receipts and sponsors... The difference between CL football and not could be in the region of £50 million a year. That goes some way to paying for a better standard of player. We should be embracing the fact that the bigger clubs opt to rest players in the FA Cup. It gives small clubs like Derby a chance of actually winning a trophy (something I would love to witness in my lifetime). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Ram Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 7 hours ago, Bris Vegas said: What are you talking about - throwing one? Klopp would have analysed the three games in six days and picked the starting XI for each game he deems is good enough to win the match. Or are you suggesting he purposely fielded a side he knew would lose to Wolves? Liverpool lost... So what? On another day they would have won. It's how football works, you win some and you lose some. Liverpool's XI that day was good enough to win, they just didn't... If you don't play your younger players, then they won't improve. It's tough enough as it is for young English talent to break in to the top club's starting XI, so Klopp should be praised for trusting so many at one time. And yes I do know any other team would have made changes. Because it's unrealistic to suggest your best squad of say 14 players can play three games in six days. Chelsea made 9 changes. Were they arrogant? Come on, I want to hear all about how Antonio Conte is arrogant for fielding a weakened side. And throw in Arsenal, Spurs and United too who all made at least 8 changes... Or is it just because Liverpool lost that Klopp is arrogant? Mourinho, Wenger, Conte and Pochettino are all OK because their sides won... On another day they all could have lost. Football for you... Let's take this point by point. Yes it almost akin to throwing one. You said yourself it was his least important and he made a choice to field a weak side. He knew that it was a possibility, so was accepting the possibility of losing. If he really wanted to win, he would have picked a different team. It's like he is saying, yeah okay we win, we win, we lose, we lose.. No big one. Arrogant and disrespectful. 'Liverpool lost.. So what' - Exactly, I don't give a **** and it seems neither did Klopp. So he went in a half arsed way. Win and lose, yes that is how football works and that is accepted if at least you try. Did he by picking that team? He knew the possible outcome of doing that and accepted it. Any team can find a way of playing younger players. They have always found a way of doing this before within a normal season, they have since football began. Why now do we have to make 8 changes to five them a chance. Then you bung them in with players that have not played with before as a team.. What is the sense in that? How does that develop them? Injuries and suspensions offer opportunities. If they are good enough to be in the first team squad then they take those as they come along. It makes me wonder how we ever got players through before.. How did we ever manage eh? Yes 'other' teams make changes and as I said in my original post that is okay within reason. 6 teams made 51 changes at the weekend and they all lost. That is too many, what does that achieve? Why is it unrealistic to ask you first choice players to play 3 games in 6 days??? What are clubs doing wrong that they cannot do that? Chelsea did make 9 changes, yes.. But they included those untried youngsters John Terry and Ivanovic etc. Ake !! Not too risky.. Southampton made numerous changes, so that sort of nullifies the Arsenal changes. Spurs, almost went out.. Did not see the United team yesterday but I am guessing some of those changes would have been the likes of Rooney getting 90 mins.. Any manager that chooses the wholesale change route in the FA Cup is arrogant and disrespectful. Disrespectful to the competition, their fans and the opposition. What about the 45,000 or so Liverpool fans who paid their money. What about the Leeds fans who traveled to Sutton? What about the Brighton fans who traveled to Lincoln.. Do they not count? What is the clubs responsibility to them. Why are midtable teams like Watford making so many changes. Also mid table Championship teams making these wholesales changes. Disgrace ! If accepting your team is not going out to win every game by giving 100% EVERY time, then football is dying as we know it. I just cannot accept that my team would take that attitude but sadly it seems the newage customer does accept this. Not really true fans in my book. I never get in the car thinking I will do a 280 mile round trip to Pride Park and not be bothered if we win or lose. Football for you ??? Hell no, not for me. Last point.. You again have fallen into the trap that you have to choose, a club can only focus on one competition.. I just don't get that. As I said before Klopp now has the possibility of losing 4 games on the bounce at fortress Anfield. What the hell has that achieved? Tell me the positives in that. What price a win against Wolves now for confidence? Who knows.. Football for you eh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 7 hours ago, Angry Ram said: Let's take this point by point. Yes it almost akin to throwing one. You said yourself it was his least important and he made a choice to field a weak side. He knew that it was a possibility, so was accepting the possibility of losing. If he really wanted to win, he would have picked a different team. It's like he is saying, yeah okay we win, we win, we lose, we lose.. No big one. Arrogant and disrespectful. 'Liverpool lost.. So what' - Exactly, I don't give a **** and it seems neither did Klopp. So he went in a half arsed way. Win and lose, yes that is how football works and that is accepted if at least you try. Did he by picking that team? He knew the possible outcome of doing that and accepted it. Any team can find a way of playing younger players. They have always found a way of doing this before within a normal season, they have since football began. Why now do we have to make 8 changes to five them a chance. Then you bung them in with players that have not played with before as a team.. What is the sense in that? How does that develop them? Injuries and suspensions offer opportunities. If they are good enough to be in the first team squad then they take those as they come along. It makes me wonder how we ever got players through before.. How did we ever manage eh? Yes 'other' teams make changes and as I said in my original post that is okay within reason. 6 teams made 51 changes at the weekend and they all lost. That is too many, what does that achieve? Why is it unrealistic to ask you first choice players to play 3 games in 6 days??? What are clubs doing wrong that they cannot do that? Chelsea did make 9 changes, yes.. But they included those untried youngsters John Terry and Ivanovic etc. Ake !! Not too risky.. Southampton made numerous changes, so that sort of nullifies the Arsenal changes. Spurs, almost went out.. Did not see the United team yesterday but I am guessing some of those changes would have been the likes of Rooney getting 90 mins.. Any manager that chooses the wholesale change route in the FA Cup is arrogant and disrespectful. Disrespectful to the competition, their fans and the opposition. What about the 45,000 or so Liverpool fans who paid their money. What about the Leeds fans who traveled to Sutton? What about the Brighton fans who traveled to Lincoln.. Do they not count? What is the clubs responsibility to them. Why are midtable teams like Watford making so many changes. Also mid table Championship teams making these wholesales changes. Disgrace ! If accepting your team is not going out to win every game by giving 100% EVERY time, then football is dying as we know it. I just cannot accept that my team would take that attitude but sadly it seems the newage customer does accept this. Not really true fans in my book. I never get in the car thinking I will do a 280 mile round trip to Pride Park and not be bothered if we win or lose. Football for you ??? Hell no, not for me. Last point.. You again have fallen into the trap that you have to choose, a club can only focus on one competition.. I just don't get that. As I said before Klopp now has the possibility of losing 4 games on the bounce at fortress Anfield. What the hell has that achieved? Tell me the positives in that. What price a win against Wolves now for confidence? Who knows.. Football for you eh! To counter your points: 1) Klopp didn't field a 'weak' side. He fielder a 'weaker' side. He still had an XI out there that clearly had enough ability to beat Wolves. He could have played his best team and lost. He couldn't play his best team, not with three games in six days. How can you not comprehend this? 2) Klopp clearly did give a ****. He would have wanted to win, and played a team he felt could win. He could have played an entire U18 side, but he didn't. They tried. What's your point? They wanted to win. 3) Three games in six days. You have to make changes, and what better opportunity to field a few of your best youngsters and squad players than at home to lower-league opposition. It was totally normal and made sense. 4) Are you serious? Three games in six days is suicide for pro players. Later on in the season it would come back and bite them, players would suffer burn-out, fatigue and potential long-term injuries. They're not robots... 5) Did you even see Liverpool's starting line-up? They included Firmino, Klavan, Moreno, Lucas, Wijnaldum. Karius and Origi. Three first-team regulars and four others who get regular action in the squad. Hardly 11 U18 players. 6) Klopp didn't make 'wholesale changes'. He only included four younger players, one of which was Joe Gomez who was a regular under Brendan Rodgers. They had a good enough team to win, it wasn't arrogant or disrespectful. The best teams generally play a consistent starting XI as much as possible. If you're suggesting squad players and youngsters should be thrown in throughout the season, then you're advocating a rotation policy which is hardly the key to consistency. You can't have it both ways. I don't even know what you're talking about in regards to giving 100%. Those Liverpool players at the weekend wanted to win the match. Are you suggesting they didn't? As for newage customer and accepting defeat. Again, I have no idea what you're talking about. Klopp did what he thought was best for his team. He knows better than you, a fan who doesn't quite grasp that's suicide to play your best team for three games in six days yet advocates a rotation policy for the rest of the season. Your points make no sense at all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Ram Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 13 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said: To counter your points: 1) Klopp didn't field a 'weak' side. He fielder a 'weaker' side. He still had an XI out there that clearly had enough ability to beat Wolves. He could have played his best team and lost. He couldn't play his best team, not with three games in six days. How can you not comprehend this? 2) Klopp clearly did give a ****. He would have wanted to win, and played a team he felt could win. He could have played an entire U18 side, but he didn't. They tried. What's your point? They wanted to win. 3) Three games in six days. You have to make changes, and what better opportunity to field a few of your best youngsters and squad players than at home to lower-league opposition. It was totally normal and made sense. 4) Are you serious? Three games in six days is suicide for pro players. Later on in the season it would come back and bite them, players would suffer burn-out, fatigue and potential long-term injuries. They're not robots... 5) Did you even see Liverpool's starting line-up? They included Firmino, Klavan, Moreno, Lucas, Wijnaldum. Karius and Origi. Three first-team regulars and four others who get regular action in the squad. Hardly 11 U18 players. 6) Klopp didn't make 'wholesale changes'. He only included four younger players, one of which was Joe Gomez who was a regular under Brendan Rodgers. They had a good enough team to win, it wasn't arrogant or disrespectful. The best teams generally play a consistent starting XI as much as possible. If you're suggesting squad players and youngsters should be thrown in throughout the season, then you're advocating a rotation policy which is hardly the key to consistency. You can't have it both ways. I don't even know what you're talking about in regards to giving 100%. Those Liverpool players at the weekend wanted to win the match. Are you suggesting they didn't? As for newage customer and accepting defeat. Again, I have no idea what you're talking about. Klopp did what he thought was best for his team. He knows better than you, a fan who doesn't quite grasp that's suicide to play your best team for three games in six days yet advocates a rotation policy for the rest of the season. Your points make no sense at all... Okay, you are struggling now.. 'Weak' / 'Weaker' Do me a favour!! 3 games in 6 days 'suicide for pro players' !! PMSL !! I never said 'rotation'. I said opportunities arise throughout the season with injuries and suspensions. I didn't suggest the players did not want to win.. Are you trying to put words in my mouth to enhance your point? Feeling desperate? Call the Samaritans.. I said that maybe the MANAGER was not that bothered. As for the 'newage customer' you know exactly what I mean.. You only have to read this and other forums.. Play the kids, the league is more important blah blah blah. Happy to accept 'their' teams possible loss in a game.. If SKY tell you players are tired, they must be. WTF is that all about? I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this. I am now going to see my boss and say I most certainly can't work all these hours and it will be suicidal of him to pick me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jourdan Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 I do like that Klopp is trying to integrate youngsters and I think if you give one or two a chance to play with an otherwise settled side, it can pay dividends. Playing Trent Alexander Arnold in recent weeks, as a prime example. But there is no getting away from the fact that making nine changes to Wednesday's side was a massive miscalculation. In my mind, after such a demoralising defeat on Wednesday, you play your strongest side so they can shake off that disappointment and make a statement. Then after 60-65 minutes if and surely when you are comfortably winning, you can bring on some youngsters. What better way to prepare for the Chelsea game on Tuesday than with a confidence-boosting win over a Championship side which in turn keeps their only hope of a trophy alive? The domestic cup competitions were their best shot at silverware this season. I would have thought given that League Two Plymouth managed to get a draw at Anfield, he would have learnt his lesson and that would have been the only warning that Klopp really needed, especially as it was only a matter of weeks ago. Anyone who is anyone knows that if a lower league side goes to Anfield, Liverpool rarely make light work of it. It is like a cup final for the opposition. They rise to the occasion and relish playing at such a world famous football stadium. He was playing with fire by making nine changes and got well and truly burnt. It's just sad for me that they always seem to have their act together when Derby appear on their fixture list! Why couldn't that have been us on Saturday? It would have been so sweet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Le Mesmer Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Klopp underestimates lower league sides for my number one point. He did it last season against Exeter and again this v Gargs and Wolves. Shrewsbury v Liverpool isn't like Rot Weiss Erfurt v Borussia Dortmund. It's a lot tougher. Number two point is that although I accept that making 7,8,9 changes to a side is likely to disrupt any continuity that side has on the match day. What I believe is that a lot of these young academy players don't seem able to grasp their opportunities and are outfought, outfootballed and second best all over the park to seasoned lower league players who are less cosseted. I simply believe that most academy players at top clubs aren't mature or desperate enough to really show what they are about when given these opportunities. In addition a lot of them simply aren't good enough or no better than lower league pros. It's probably an overly harsh and simplistic viewpoint but when I watch some of these youth players in action i put myself in their shoes if that were me given an opportunity to impress. I know running around like a headless chicken isn't necessarily the way to develop as a footballer but hard work, leadership and passion go a long way. I don't see any of these three qualities in many of these young / reserve players. Pampered, cosseted and coached robotically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pearl Ram Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Wolves 1 up at Barnsley, early days of course, handy all the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnero Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Villa losing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pearl Ram Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Wednesday 1 up, knocking us down to 7th from 6th, come on Brizzle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam the Ram Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 10 minutes ago, Saul Pimpson said: Villa losing 2-0 down now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtains Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Luiz scores stunning free kick against Liverpool at Anfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam the Ram Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Mowatt red card on Barnsley debut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pearl Ram Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Bah, Wednesday back in front, 2-1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmericanRam Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Brentford 3-0 over Villa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CumbrianRam Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Leicester relegation party 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.