If we were in the bottom quarter of the table I can understand you expecting to beat us but we've been playing reasonably well in most of our games despite the handicap of not having a rated striker. Admittedly today we had some luck with the goals but we had the chances and Liverpool were off form. Given the money we've spent on players we have done well. Some clubs have spent huge sums and not got much of a return. It's a poor league this season. If we can be around half way at January we may be able to make some good additions and maintain it for the rest of the season which will make it easier to get quality next season. Steve Bruce is a good manager who doesn't get carried away.
I'm inclined to agree with you there IBWT, Skrtel has been decent since he has come in,but he does upset the entire balance of our defence, him and Johnson on the right hand side of our defence is an accident waiting to happen, the former playing absolutely terrible at the moment. Sahko for me needs to be starting alongside Toure, I feel as if that combination has all the attributes to be a very good base pair - Then we just need to sort out our gaping fullback problems.
I dont think it's so much that we expected to beat you, rather if we are serious about getting top four you are the type of team we have to dispatch. The fact that we didn't shows we still have a lot of work to do. It's a tight league but you are sitting tenth at the moment. Get a striker in and you could stay around that mark. But you were certainly the better team today.
the best way off putting it is would you expect city, utd or spurs or even eveton to come to town and not expect to win and put in a performace.... that was hulls first EVER win v LFC. Hull have done very well but your home wins were v bottom half teams and your best performances have been away to the better sides. no dispresect thats just reality.. LFC wake up call.. 3 very handy points towards the magic 40 for you but LFC are thinking of 70 and those 3 points were much easier than going to tottenham you must admit... we got to do that shortly.
Yesterday, all my troubles seemed so far away Now it looks as though they're here to stay Oh, I believe in yesterday Suddenly, I'm not half the man I used to be There's a shadow hanging over me. Oh, yesterday came suddenly Why she had to go I don't know she wouldn't say I said something wrong, now I long for yesterday Yesterday, love was such an easy game to play Now I need a place to hide away Oh, I believe in yesterday Why she had to go I don't know she wouldn't say I said something wrong, now I long for yesterday Yesterday, love was such an easy game to play Now I need a place to hide away Oh, I believe in yesterday Mm mm mm mm mm mm mm
You got beat by a team two places lower than Hull. We beat you and you could only draw with the spuds. See how your logic makes you look silly?
From the era of Billy Shankly, Tommy Lawrence, Ron Yeats and Roger Hunt Liverpool have been a massive club but now border on the ordinary after today's performance. Whilst on the other hand HCFC mainly stayed around the old 2nd/3rd divisions and during the mid sixties were rather prominent but never reaching greatness. Now we can claim to at least hope to reach a decent standard that is still rather ordinary for yourselves but massive for us in going forward. Today was a set back and to blame it all on one missing player means your troubles may be more deep seated than just a missing striker, and I would suggest that with a decent striker ourselves we may have been even higher in the league than we are at the moment as we played some great stuff at the beginning of the season but missed the net. Yes today was a set back for you but you have a long history to live up to and this type of thing may happen a couple of more times yet before normal services are resumed, thanks for the banter.
Ah yes, we all know how one performance and game can give an insight into how good/club is over a course of the season I don't think I've read anyone on here say the only reason was lost is because Sturridge wasn't playing. 99% of people accept that we have a lot of poor players in the team at the moment and we need 3 or 4 quality players to be a side constantly challenging for top 4, let alone the title.
How is your logic better than mine??? United was beaten at home by a team currently lower than hull but was playing well at the time. United wasn't outplayed and a draw would have been a fair result. You don't need to be Einstein to assume that spurs at home will be a harder match than Hull
Well I didn't actually refer to my logic I just ridiculed yours. We, like you lot are inconsistent. Which means one performance good or bad has little bearing on another. Hence me jokingly using the example that following your logic since we beat you and Spurs could only draw with you, we should beat them. It's obviously nonsense. So take the next step: pointing to todays performance rather than pointing to one of our wins is arbitrary. And pointless.
I haven't been on today as I've been busy and I'm way too lazy to read back over todays reaction. My view is that todays performance was a step back to last season where we didn't play with enough urgency, we have to understand where we went wrong today and it wasn't with formations or individual performances it wasn't even tactics. It was the attitude of the collective players on the pitch not enough of them had the right attitude.
Eh? Wrong IMO. These are all inter-related. The attitude leads to individual performances, formations and tactics. From Rodgers and the players. Basically Rodgers and his players underestimated Hull and it cost them..
Today was only the third time in Premier League history that Liverpool have conceded 3 or more goals in consecutive games #MOTD Gotta sort that back line out! We are also now with 10 games no clean sheets after starting the season off with 6 clean sheets.
They can be related but if you go on the pitch with the wrong attitude (as you say underestimating a team) then tactics, formations etc will not matter. Your post is odd as it disagrees with me then makes my point? Did I word it badly? I've read back and my post seems clear.
You implied that you didn't go wrong with formations, performances and tactics. All were below par especially the performance of the manager
