http://www.liverpoolfc.com/news/latest-news/tomkins-lucas-the-counter-balance Probably for the first time this season, you can look at the most recent five league results and say the Reds have picked up more-or-less the number of points as you'd realistically hope for. Draws at Chelsea and Swansea (given their form) were more than creditable; and three points at home to each of Wigan and Southampton should be par for the course (you'll always get home games where you drop points against sides that finish towards the bottom of the table, but the key is for them to be rare off-days). A point at Spurs, which was probably what the Reds deserved, would have made it three consecutive away draws at sides currently in the top seven. Pick up at least a point away from home, and win most of your home games, and it quickly becomes top-four form. As it happened, Liverpool paid for a sluggish start at White Hart Lane. You can criticise the opening 20 minutes, but you can also praise the reaction. Slowly but surely, things are edging into shape for Rodgers' Liverpool. There's a fair way to go, and we've not seen too many "90-minute performances", but the Reds are becoming harder to beat, keeping more clean sheets and winning a few more games. The costly mistakes that were evident in the early weeks are now rarely seen. After struggling at home in the early games - in part due to the calibre of opposition, and in part due to those aforementioned gaffes - the Reds have now won three of their last four home games in the Premier League, keeping a clean sheet in each of those victories. The second half against Wigan and the first half against Southampton showcased Liverpool at their free-flowing best. A concern would be that the only four victories to date have come against relegation candidates, but the performances against Manchester City, Manchester United, Chelsea and Spurs were deserving of more than just two points (a fairer reflection would have been five or six). Only the Arsenal game, out of the five big encounters so far, left me underwhelmed by the performance. Arsenal were having a great start to the season, and look an easier proposition now winter has set in (one thing that Rodgers hasn't been afforded is good timing, with regard to the fixture list). Getting the balance right has clearly been on the manager's mind. He's tried a number of midfield permutations, to mixed results. Enforced changes at full-back also hasn't helped, and it was only against Southampton, with the return of Lucas Leiva and with Glen Johnson playing at right-back, that you got a sense of everything being in the right place. This is not a criticism of playing players out of position, as I think far too much gets made of that. Likewise, the expression 'round peg in a square hole' gets overused. While you will always have specialists, who only really excel in one key area, many footballers have transferrable skills. Johnson, for example, was consistently good at left-back, and, as an example that playing people out of position can actually bring benefits, Jose Enrique only rediscovered his best form once moved to the left wing. Back in defence, he looks like the left-back Liverpool signed 18 months ago. It's just that, with the line-up on Saturday, the team gelled a bit better. Once you get too many players in unnatural positions there's perhaps a breakdown of instinctive movement, where players have to take a split second longer to think about what to do. And of course, one particular player helped several others. Lucas is brilliant at knowing where to be, and even lacking match fitness, he made a big difference in stopping Liverpool from being vulnerable to counter-attacks. He made more than twice as many tackles (eight) as the next Liverpool player (who was on three), and won seven of them. With the return of the Brazilian, there were also fewer rookies in the team that faced Southampton. I think it's fair to say that all of the youngsters have done a very good job indeed, and some have excelled. The experience will serve them - and Liverpool - well. But it's rarely ideal for instant results. Manchester United may have won the title in 1996 with "kids" (if you don't know what I'm getting at, Google Alan Hansen and "you don't win anything with..."), but they also had five or six very experienced players who featured in over 20 league games: Peter Schmeichel (33), Denis Irwin (31), Brian McLair (33), Gary Pallister (30) and Eric Cantona (30), with Andy Cole, Lee Sharpe and Roy Keane hardly youngsters at 25. Even the much-vaunted "kids" weren't that young: Ryan Giggs was 22, Nicky Butt 21, Gary Neville 21, Paul Scholes 22 and David Beckham 21. Only Phil Neville was in his teens (18). Contrast that with Raheem Sterling, 17, Suso, (only recently turned 19) and Andre Wisdom, 19. Full article on the link at the top.
I'd spotted this earlier, I was going to post it myself if it was a decent read but not had time to read it yet
Ask yourself why he's comparing it to the best United side in a generation & the famous Barca academy? What relevance do either have to the current midtable Liverpool side of 2012? The thought process that has arrived at the comparison & therefore the suggestion that there's a sensible current comparable, makes me laugh, as it's typical of the kopite mentality.
Because it is a benchmark of where we would like to be. Nice try though Now suck me off and then piss off.
Funny, the comparisons didn't draw my immediate attention; I read it as just another article on what we all knew. Lucas makes a big difference to THIS (not uniteds or Barca's) team in terms of balance, strength, tactical awareness & experience both in what he brings & what he frees up others to do.. It also points to how there has been improvement over the BR time period & when you look at points vs teams played recently its about right for the strength of our current squad. I fail to see what is unrealistic about that. The comparisons are, if anything at all an attempt to say that some of our accusers when dishing out criticism are holding this team to an unrealistic standard in their rush to rant; which is ironic since the overall theme of most of our critics is that we are mid table mediocrity. Can't have it both ways folks.
I totally agree about Lucas, he's a player who's underated by the majority of English football fans. He's a very important player to Liverpool & his return will undoubtedly strengthen your side. His stats on Saturday were impressive, especially considering it was his first game back. But the piece doesn't focus on Lucas's contribution, despite the title bearing his name. Instead it draws inane comparisons that have no real relevance & who's sole aim appears to be to justify the overall poor position that you're currently in.
I think Dortmund is the best comparison, everything from manager and the philsophy to having a kind of aging and not really quality side that was turned around and built from within. Klopps first season I think they were 13th, something like that?
my only question is did tomkins write this about 6 weeks ago or what cos its just a fluff drawpiece for when lucas returned. nothing new, no spectacular made up stats on lucas' performance v the saints... etc etc. can say as it mertis much other comment as its precisely what everyon on this site said before this guy published. we've already said it we don't need him to tell us and then add some fluff lfc propaganda to please the new paymasters to remind us of what we already know about lucas and who we've beatn or not and what kids are playing. If he'd write a peice comparing actual performance v rodgers promise (attacking football with sensible tactical play and actual peentration) that'd be soemthing as its not all bad news but i think the pay masters don't want to admit they've stiffed us badly.
