We're not moaning about games though. I'm certainly not. Stop putting up straw men. In fact having a lot of games at this part of the season normally means you are in the mix for trophies which is great. Would I trade our C.L semi finals to have a better shot at the next 4 league games...not a chance. My point is that not being in Europe has helped Liverpool do better in the league. Do you genuinely dispute this? To clarify, I'm NOT saying this is the sole reason you may or may not win the league, nor denying that Chelsea and City could have performed better with the investment and squads they have. I'm also not saying it is some sort of unfair advantage. Merely pointing out one reason (of which there are many) to explain your rather sudden rise from a team that finished 7th last year to top 1-2 this year. Now try and avoid a 'smart arse' reply or rant and look at the point objectively......
Done I want it off my hands, but someone else might be moving in, I dont know, its all in the air and stressful Might just buy a camper van and **** off! Mrs (am married) is up for it
If you think we'd have exactly the same squad had we been in the CL then there is no dispute, it has helped. However, the reality of it is, had we been in the CL we'd have had a few more players to chose from, whether that be some signings we didn't make or us send less loan players out. My point is, if we had CL football this season, not just the fixture list would have been different so its a unfair stance IMO.
Fair enough. I don't think your squad would have been much different if just in just Europa League though as it doesn't generate much money to go on a spending spree.
You did say we had done brilliantly to be fair I agree that being out of Europa has helped us Also though, since Jan 13 we have been showing this kind of good form. We have had more time on the training ground as well this season and I think a large chunk from going from 7th to where we're is down to that
No, if it had just been EL then we wouldn't have sent as many out on loan. Of course, had we still been involved at this stage of the season then it would have effected us more as the first choice picks would have been playing more.
No midweek games helps a bit at the business end of the season for sure, at the start of the season everyone wants to play every game and players don't have to play a full 90 minutes in a game so they can take part in 3 games a week no problem early in a season. But.. what you said was, Liverpool wouldn't be where they are if they had European games, if we were in the CL this season we'd have bought more players last summer, with CL attractions n all. So we'd have had more depth. This makes it all a pointless argument that holds no water. Also backed up by the fact that every year the PL is won by a CL competing team The bitterness, when a team not competing may win it, no CL is key to that success is claimed, which is ludicrous tbh
It's not about how many games the team plays, it is about how many games the individual players play.
This is more down to the fact a team who wins the league has normally finished top 4 the year before more than being in the C.L gets you a better squad. If Liverpool win the league this year, it'll be the first time I can remember someone improving their league position that greatly in 12 months to win it. Normally the winner comes from someone who finished top 2 the previous year, let alone top 4, let alone 7th. The rise is as spectacular as United's fall and people will look for explanations (not just excuses). Without any major investment during that time, stability and lack of games compared to your rivals will obviously be put out there. Not being bitter just stating an opinion.
That's kind of his point, usually the league winners are competing in Europe too. If we win it, it'll be the first instance of a non-European competing team winning the Premier League, no team has finished outside the top three and won it the following season.
But it can't be down to lack of Europe because otherwise there would be other case studies of teams doing it or at least coming close - which there aren't. Lack of Europe might have helped out in some ways, but it can't be the deciding factor. To most Reds fans, the jump isn't as spectacular as others are making out. Our football from last January was impressive and that's what gave us hope for this season - not simply hopeful delusion. If non-LFC people can't see our progress made outside of this season, that's not our fault.
Teams who finish 7th in England almost always are challenging for the title, and top of the league with 4 games left. Mourinho is right. Also, the £50mill you earn from doing well in Europe is completely offset by costs to get your £ changed to DM and Francs, etc... bloody bankers. God forbid you play Celtic and have to convert your money to Scottish £. You totally can't buy any extra players with the money you get from Europe.
Whats easier. 40 games ( you may end up playing 1 or 2 more than that but I believe you were knocked out of all cups at the first attempt? 38 league games + 2 cup games = 40 ). or 60+ games ( 38 league games + cup runs and european runs ). Which of the above is easier and which team has an advantage. Essentially Liverpool are part timers
If you worked part time and I worked full time doing the same job but as well as more hours I had to travel around europe every other week while you sat at home monday to friday watching Jeremy Kyle who's got it easier?
Whereas United are real nowhere men, living in a nowhere land, making all their nowhere plans for nobody
Chelsea will have 5 days to prepare for their next game. Their opponents will have 2 days. Chelsea are playing against setups. #fake
