Brendan Rodgers almost did it at the end he fell short. Perhaps he learnt his lesson and now doing well at Celtic.
They had all Summer to sort out that defence, but instead put all their eggs in one basket on a player that is contracted for another 5 years.
You could probably get 7th place with Everton too, I think that big Ron should be aiming a little higher this season.
Hi Saint. Firstly i totally accept it's way more fun to watch your team attack then defend and ideally you'd win by attacking. Anyone who doesn't take a 5-4 win over a 1-0 must be a boring person. However, Jimmys point about a balanced team is the most important. Bad defences VERY rarely win the league (to be fair Klopps defences have ranked 5th and joints 8th best in his 2 seasons, this year it's looking really bad though). Starting from the year 2000 (i was too lazy to go back any further). The champions have finished: I guess it does emphasize that you definitely need a good attack as no one has ever won the league without an attack in the top 3. You also need a good defence. In the past 17 years, the champions have only ever had a defence worse than the joint top 3rd twice. As jimmy says, its about balance. #stattoBob
wow... thanks for sharing bobby. that is quite impressive work. I agree totally. "the very best defence" is not necessarily the best team. Examples are west brom under pulis verses arsenal under george graham. both mean, one won things the other never looked like it Being just plain midtable defence won't win you a thing. LFC finished 2nd under rogers, we got 4th under klopp when the attack failed. My views is the most telling column in the whole table is games won. Its very rare to be less than 28 and only twice was it less than 25. to win this league you need lots of points and to get lost of point you need to win games. So in the end you are right you need the balance of a very good attack scoring the winners but you certainly don't need to leak like a sieve at the back. interestingly ony twice was 40 goals conceded by a champion. Both times by utd who scored double the goals and had extremely high points totals. I have said it many times. I feel our defence has got a lot worse this season and its about balance, we simply look wide open to one pass making a one on one. There's only 15% of the matches gone and we have let in 11 goals. thats a full 25% of those title winning teams. 2 goals per game scored by 1.9 goals per game conceded. Compliments again on your well made point.
I went back to The Dawn Of Time, aka the start of the PL. My figures showed that higher scorers won the league over the best defence in the same season more often than the reverse. . It wasn't every time (and sometimes of course the same team had both), and I never claimed that it was - I was prompted to look into it because of all the people who maintain that a strong defence is absolutely necessary in order to win. You know, the usual stuff " So you'd rather lose playing entertaining football than win by being negative and boring?" I just wanted to show this up as the false dichotomy it is, and that by playing good attacking football you're just as likely to be successful. I showed the results on here, not the whole thing. I don't know what I've done with me working out, sir, though I should have kept it handy knowing that some bugger would argue the ****ing toss ad infinitum.
no bones to pick. You are right that you need a good attack in fact even just on my evidence it need to be top 3. I agree you don't need the best defence, just a competent one. Without a decent defence (which you currently do not have whether you want to blame personnel or system) you won't be winning leagues. Still though, that isn't an issue with you as Klopp is satisfying you're number 1 enjoyment which is game entertainment and you guys are definitely a great side to watch
Yes, you are. Perhaps out of context it looks that way, or perhaps I'm not explaining myself properly. You can be successful without a strong defence, so yes, the fact that you must have one is a fallacy. Nevertheless, a strong defence allied to a potent attack is clearly best of all, therefore balance is the optimum. Do you still see those two statements as mutually exclusive?
Its only great when its like the arsenal game. When its like the ****e served v leicester is not very entertaining. Its more stressful than anything.
Of course that aren't. I suppose it is out of context with respect to that post of yours but it's in line with the whole convo with Jimmy (the good defence part). If you can be bothered you can read back as Jimmy wanted both good attack and good defence. Anyway, your comments may be misconstrued as i believe what you are actually tired of is the phrase defence wins championships which is not true. Think i've done enough of this debate as we're boring everyone . Lets just agree you are happy and liverpool have been good to watch this year so far
Yes but you're not saintklopp so who cares what you think . I can imagine it being stressful i hate watching chelsea defend a 1 goal lead
