Yeah fittter might just mean better at recovering but also having at least two quality players for each position negates a lot of those problems. Plus as well as being a physical problem it's also a mental problem at some clubs. When a manager complains about extra games and fatigue etc it gives the players an excuse to do less next game whether conciously or subconciously. For me our poor league positions in recent years has far more to do with awful owners, chopping and changing managers and wasting shed loads of cash on ****e players than it has to do with a few Thursday games.
I totally agree, if you've got options, to come in and at least be able to play against the likes of a stoke or fulham away and be better than them then you can manage the top players more through the season. Your points are all valid, if we'd simply held rafa for all these years its obvious to me that we would not have been as bad or wasted as much time in the middle. But most of all the shed loads of cash on awful players who were worse than that fielded by the likes of fulham and sotke is the biggest sin. I still find those stats interesting. It says to me we need really good midfield options to come in for lucas etc... when we had maraschano alonso, sissoko, gerrard, and even lucas we had a lot of options to have players in those key slots do the running and closing down. Again the same thing about Johnson and enrique, on their day they look good but put a bit of tiredness on johnson and he looks bloody awful. I reckon its this and not the forwards that needs more cover.
Definitely UEFAs appauling handling of the competition has made it less attractive financially and it garners less interest than it should but for me there's still enough value in it for other reasons. Youth experience, manager experience, maintaing a bigger squad and fans getting to more games being 4 of the main ones.
Absolutely. The stats are useful and do tell us a lot. I just don't agree they tell us we're better off without EL as the author of the article claims. They tell us what we all knew anyway. Our squad isn't (or certainly wasn't) good enough. As for strengthening other areas again I agree. We really do need more quality across the back 4 and defensively in midfield both in the first team and in the squad. Obviously an injury free season for Kelly (if only) and Wisdom would be a massive help but I'd still like more quality at CB and at least some more cover behind Enrique and Lucas within the squad.
the youth experience is great but tempered by the latter competition having so many rounds. I think certainly there is too much of the MON villa type shenanigans going on where people are short changing the comp and some tough sanctions are in order to preserve it. I think clearing say 15 mil min and having a route to the CL would be of value here. 7mil total for winning it aint enough when some ****e CL team can drop in and clear 25mil from the tv rights over the season. The comp needs to have the prize upped, less rounds and I think then we'd see less of the rubbish english teams in it and more of the top 6/7 teams consistently performing in it and using it to prepare to be a CL team. Really most of all i think City should be banned form europe along with chelsea for gross spending... put monaco, PSG and a few others in that category too and then the real agenda would become apparent.
I think we should be banned as well for paying a total of nearly £100 mill for Aquaman, Mandy, Downing, Allen and Borini I guess in buying all that ****e we effectively banned ourselves
We also made two domestic cup finals the season before too! And our form was shocking after winning the first! I'd explain the change in goals scored and conceeded on a change of tactics. BR seems much more gang-ho then Kenny did. Kenny had his sides tight and compact with the intention of building up slowly from the back. BR likes to pass from the back but he sends both FB's forward immediately and spreads the CBs out wide, this leaves masses of space for the opposition to exploit. Not checked the statistics but which manager suffered more counter-attack goals? I know where my guess lands. Also, which manager experienced more defensive errors? Of course, you could also look at MFG's favourite...woodworks! This surely counts as luck too? PS...sorry for the 'tosh' and short response. Busy at work and tried to make a quick (too quick) comment
We should always strive to do the best we can and compete in the best competition we can, therefore if no CL then EL has to do. I agree with all who said that if we can't compete in the Europy then what chance have we in the big one? Players being tired is a miserable excuse imo. They're young men at the peak of their health and fitness and if they can't play two games a week then God help them. Maybe they should try working for a living?
again i agree its just the stats who that while they might do the same distance they seem to not be doing the same sprints or intensive running. Its a science at this point so if one side has two days recover and the other has 6 for example then surely fulham or stoke just have less lactic acid build up or whatever and will just be that more able to cover the ground? multiply that over the whole year and thats where the results tail off. thats why i also highlighted both years they picked out we were out of cups early at home so when europa ended both kenny and Rodgers got that pick up from one game a week. I'm hopeful that with more attacking options (not out and out line leaders though) we can do better but most of all I'm hoping that the lack of midfield options effect is lessened by not playing twice a week. if lucas and gerrard cna actually play for 90mins and not look jaded after 30mins each half then more sloppy goals are cut out.
Again all that science is all well and good MITO but look at the top English and top European teams and their results don't tail off after midweek games. Do our players get a bigger lactic acid build up than theirs? How many United players or Barca or Munich players deal with two games a week, week in week out? Enough to suggest this really shouldn't be an issue. Also did our results under Kenny get better after we went out of Europe? We were bollocks the second half of that season.
Did you see our fixtures after the Zenit game? Wigan (A), Spurs (H), Southampton (A), Villa (A), West Ham (H), Reading (A), Chelsea (H), Newcastle (A), Everton (H), Fulham (A) & QPR (H). That's a really easy fixture list. All our tougher games at home, the away ones all against relegation battling teams or teams with not much to play for (Fulham). I'd be shocked if we didn't pick up more points and score more goals than in the other 27 matches of the season. As for the 2010-11 stats then lets not remember most of the games before elimination were played under Hodgson with a sulking Torres while after elimination we had Kenny as manager, Suarez as a striker and a side full of confidence. Nothing to do with the Europa league.
What I don't understand is teams who play all year round to get into Europe (mid table teams who aren't fighting relegation but not top 4, which I guess you could include us at the moment) only to then when they get into Europe, play a **** team, moan about it and want to get out of it again If your ambition is not to get into Europe, then you might as well just give up being a happy club sitting in mid table until you get taken over by a billionaire. Europe should be something to aim for (which I guess comes back to shortening the Europa league and stop Champ League teams entering) and then once you're there it's about competing, getting a reputation as a club throughout Europe which allows you to attract bigger players, then progressing up the league, into Champ League then competing for the title.
i agree. this is what stoke did and for some reason decided 45 points from pulis was no longer enough... then appointed HUGHES... queue relegation... perhaps fulahm under jol is a better exmaple of floating along.... The thing about it is everton are a perfect example of the type of club we are talking on. For us the europa aint big enough, for everton under moyes it and the league cup were hassles to ge tout of. the goals was 6th and an fa cup run every year.... I also agree on the fixture. end of year easy runs where we picked up decent points but not championship form. it still must be said if the goals for and against stats were applied over a whole season its be easy to get 4th... thats the thing about stats eh?
Ive seen this PR bulls**t spouted by apologists looking to cover up the fact Liverpool arn't in the Europa league next season. It's a cop out, which will only be seen to be valid if Liverpool get 4th on the back of not playing in Europe when all their Rivals are. Money: Chelsea made 9M Euros in Prize money from the Europa League KO stages alone. They are also gonna get 3M or 2.2M euros as winners or runners up in the Super Cup. Add to that the revenue from the matches played and your talking around 15M euros. Not to be sniffed at. Euro Ranking: Liverpool's Euro ranking is now 27th and its gonna get lower still before the season ends. It makes it a lot harder to get through the Playoff round if we qualify 4th and then you can easily get a group of death (like City) Profile: Big clubs should be in Europe, Period! CL Qualification: From 2014/15 winning the Europa will get you entry in the CL playoff round or the Group stage if the CL winners qualify through their league position (which is very likely)
