Reflecting on the Chelsea game I'm thinking to myself did BR get this game wrong. Chelsea were awful but their game plan was obvious from even before the game, just to stifle Liverpool. However that being said even I found the time wasting in the first 10 minutes unpalatable. The thing is there was no way Chelsea were going to score unless we gifted them a goal and we gifted them 2! Liverpool went Kamikaze headlong into one of europe most expensive teams and it went horribly wrong. Even some semblance of a back line and they wouldn't have got either goal but was playing such a high line against Chelsea a good idea? The answer is No for a number of reasons 1. a point would of kept it in our hands, Chelsea would have no chance of scoring if we had been more composed. 2. We haven't been playing well for half a dozen games but, and have been lucky in the last few games. maybe a more cautious approach would have been wiser. Think this is a good lesson for BR especially for the CL next year sometimes a draw is good enough.
It is a difficult one. However it shows a lack of experience from our players as we have not had to deal with this very often. Think how teams would set up at Old Trafford, resulting in Man United having to play against that pretty much every home game. They got very good at stretching a tight defence and finding little pockets of space, coupled with good finishing, resulting in goals. This team has not really had to deal with that type of play to this extent and it comes from being top of the league with a dangerous attack. There were mistakes across the team and manager. It could be argued this is exactly the type of game that we could have done with Henderson rather than Gerrard. Gerrards game is long, counter attacking balls that pick out runners behind a defence, but the way Chelsea played prevented this tactic from working. Gerrard isn't very good at tight passing in and around the 18 yard box and this was one of the problems. Liverpools tactic is to give Gerrard the ball and launch fast attacks, exploiting the space behind full backs to allow the pace of the attack to get in behind and through defensive lines. The game highlighting frailty in the squad depth as without Henderson on the bench there were limited options on the bench. In fact it would have been good to have been able to bring on Tex in the place of Gerrard rather than Lucas. The problem was that the team did not have the patience needed to draw the opposition out and stretch the lines. If you take Barcelona a couple of years back when they faced a team like this. They move the ball around patiently about 20 yards out seeing if there are spaces and drawing players out. This was done by passing close to the defenders and dragging one or two players out that would allow an attacking player some space. Our game against Fulham game was the best example of this for Liverpool as constant, patient pressure, resulted in a penalty. Do remember though that even against that defence we still nearly scored several times. Also the first goal was an individual mistake, not a problem with tactics, while the second goal was due to the need to push on in the last couple of minutes.
Really? What game were you watching? Baring some Gerard hit n hopes, don't remember too many times we were genuinely in trouble. Especially given how much of the ball you had.
Fully agree. You guys are like west ham on steroids, just no way of getting through your ranks of blue. Were it not for the gerrard slip it would have been 0-0. The second goal only came because we had every player in your box trying to get a point
No BR got it spot on. That is a fact. This is not some lower league team paying with 10 men behind the ball it was a squad that cost £180 Million. it is very difficult when that many good players play that narrow and sit back like that, for any team to play against. Chelsea never looked like scoring, except from one set piece with the free header. Ba and Schur were boxed off and we were controlling the game. We didn't over commit. We just had static forwards that wanted the ball to feet and not making timed runs which is what is required for the midfield to chip balls over the top, early on Suarez made a few runs like this as Chelsea sat back but no one gave him any service on these runs. The game developed into a pattern and that is how it becomes very easy for Chelsea to sit back. Sahko's miss from 4 yards, if we had taken the lead we'd have won as Chelsea looked to equalise we would have exploited that. Gerrard's slip and gift to Ba was the one thing you cannot afford in a game like that one yesterday. We could never have afforded to let Chelsea have the lead in this game and Rodgers cannot account for a mistake like that. Otherwise it would have been a draw and in our hands still. Mistakes happen, **** happens. If Kompany had not sliced clear we'd have been level on points with Chelsea atm, so.. One mistake gave us 2 points, and another has cost us 1 point. Rodgers got it spot on, I think the players looked short of energy and ideas yesterday, we missed that sharp edge in attack
i totally agree with timmy. and was very worried before this game. in short we've a history of chasing games. in this one chelsea came to frustrate knowing they;d get a chance or two. we conceded v west ham close to half time and gerrard was already playing a pass before he controlled the ball. result 1-0 and game over i said before the game 0-0 was what i'd take if offered. if we sat back and controlled that game and just probed and got 0-0 the prem would be in our hands and chelsea would be 5 points back looking at 3rd.... Its not the formation with split cbs its the chasing the game, taking wild shots rather than trying to turn them... its not having a clue where to pass it and we never got one direct free kick in hsooting position, not one pen shoot.. suggests discipline on one side and the other not having a clue what to do.
The dust has settled. The game has gone. We move on and we go again. Two games left, lets get two wins and see what happens
Congratulations to Chelsea. Maureen got his tactics right and they implemented it perfectly. We may not like it but it was effective. For me the game showed our lack of experience. By the middle of the first half it was clear that they were going to sit back and deny space and we were sticking to the knitting in attack. It was in effect stalemate. With the benefit of hindsight, Rodgers should then have changed our tactics and we should have eased into a less frantic mode of play. We needed to draw them further forward and make their midfield come searching for the ball. That would have opened the space eventually. It's not new, Nottingham Forrest used to do it to us home and away for season until we learnt to kick the ball across the halfway line and make them come and find it. It isn't pretty but it's the best way to counter the bus parkers. Well now Rodgers has to show his man management skills and get them up for the next one. The team have to show that whilst they're young, they are man enough to cope with a loss and disappointment. We as supporters have to show that we haven't given up on them or the title. Sunday left a sour taste but today we pick ourselves up and go again.
Pretty sure that's what we were doing when Gerrard slipped; passing it about at the back hoping to draw them out. Once Chelsea had scored, they were never going to go searching for possession, they sat back and let us have it. I said before the game that the worst thing that could happen was Chelsea taking the lead.
I think that's a fair assessment of it tbh. We all knew Chelsea would go to Anfield with that type of game plan, and so it shouldn't have come as a surprise. Yet again it proved to be very effective and the fact that it took you over 50 minutes to register an effort on target tells it's own story. They blocked you finding a way through the centre of their defence by sheer weight of numbers, thus you had to resort to getting the ball in from wide positions, which played to their strengths as you didn't have a physical presence in there. You ended up being limited to hopeful crosses and long range efforts.
No, I don't think that we were trying to draw them out in the 2nd part of the first half. To me it looked more like we were still trying to hold possession and look for a runner or a little bit of space in front. When I say kick the ball along the halfway, I mean literally that. Leave the attackers and AMs (ooh modern speak!!) to stroll about. Play the ball with absolutely no forward intent whatsoever. You then create a dilemma for the defending team as they are never going to have the ball unless they come and find it. Playing football without a ball is very un-nerving even for professionals.
i also agree. the tactic was so obvious to everyone but we chased it and chased it unnecessarily. it told that only once did we get in behind them. i would have rathered take 40 corners and hope than play they way we did particularly gerrard trying to hit every shot under the sun as 90% schwazer could have thrown his cap on them anyway.... the good thing is we've two games to go for and we've hope any slip for city gifts it back to us villa and everton before any last game drama...
I guess this comes down to opinion. I think we do that every week, I think the reason we pass it about at the back, we are waiting for gaps to exploit. Whether that be through our movement or the opposition coming out, we pass it about and maintain possession waiting for gaps to exploit. For the record, I don't think Chelsea would have ever come searching for the ball unless they were behind. I'm convinced Mourinho would have taken a point before the game.
Fed up talking about Sunday now. I've suddenly realised that I know almost nothing about Palace and their players! How the hell am I going to be able to pontificate without some background? For those who are tempted to say that I usually do
Gerrard header and Suarez shot at the end are the two deffos, plus Sakhos skied effort in the first half. I more mean opportunities to take that we didn't.
Bristol City fan in peace. Whether you win the title or finish second, you have had a fantastic season with attacking football that is a joy to watch. I don't like defensive football like Chelsea did but they have enough quality in their side to do it very well unlike lesser teams who are nowhere near as organised when they try these tactics. Maybe the only consolation for you is that if you don't win the title, it is unlikely to be Chelsea's. You just have to hope the Toffees help you out but whatever happens, you will be even better next season, Best wishes for the remainder of the season.
Thanks mate. That's great stuff coming from a 'neutral'. It's good to know our team's style of play and approach are appreciated
If Guardiola's Barca couldn't get through Mourinho's 10-man Inter with their tippy-tappy central passing, then we wouldn't either. That is the wrong approach to breaking the double-decker bus defence. Neither is shooting from 30 yards. I'm no football genius, but it doesn't take one to realise that we should have done more of the following: 1- Present more of an attacking threat from wide areas. Flano god-bless-him was useless. GJ had some good ventures forward, which he either wasted after some good work, or cut it inside to soon as he had nobody overlapping. If Sturrdige was fit, Sterling would provide more mayhem from out wide. 2- Shoot from between the bus decks, i.e. take quick shots just around the 16 yard line, instead of useless shots from outside the bus. Coutinho and Gerrard's shots were wasted prayers.
Good article... http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...-supposed-to-return-to-liverpool-9294482.html Steven Gerrard suffers cruellest twist of fate on day Premier League title was supposed to return to Liverpool Captain's fateful slip on the cusp of half-time was Greek in dramatic scope KEVIN GARSIDE Author Biography ANFIELD Sunday 27 April 2014 4 PRINT A A A Now is the time to gather in a huddle, to remember what you are about and what might be. Brendan Rodgers did not have to throw a protective arm around his captain, to speak words of justification on behalf of Steven Gerrard, but he did. Ads by Google Cholesterol Study Looking for People with Cardiovascular Disease. Learn more. clinlife.co.uk/High_Cholesterol Stainless Steel Wire Manufacturer and Stockholder of ALL grades of Stainless Steel Wire www.techwire.co.uk Audible Audio Books 30-Day Free Trial. No Obligation. Over 100,000 titles. Download Today audible.co.uk He wanted the message out there that despite this defeat, despite the cruel twist that fate had in store for Gerrard, the skipper has nothing to prove in this city and Liverpool had already delivered on their promises this season, met their Champions League target, and might still lift the ultimate prize. Liverpool ran into a double road block, falling for the old one-two at the end of each half. “There was only one team trying to win it,” Rodgers said. “I’m incredibly proud of my players. I told them that at half-time. We tried our best to break them down but it wasn’t our day. Congratulations to Chelsea and to Jose [Mourinho]. They got the win today, but that is not how I want to play.” Providence could not have scripted a more cruel role for Gerrard, a player who has done more than any other in the post-1990 period to return Liverpool to the pinnacle of the game. His fateful slip on the cusp of half-time, allowing Demba Ba to drive a stake through the heart of the Kop, was Greek in dramatic scope. Liverpool 0 Chelsea 2: Player ratings 1 of 24 Simon Mignolet 6Glen Johnson 6Martin Skrtel 6Mamadou Sakho 6Jon Flanagan 5Lucas Leiva 6Joe Allen 6Steven Gerrard 5Philippe Coutinho 6Raheem Sterling 7Luis Suarez 6Daniel Sturridge 5 (substitute) Mark Schwarzer 7Cesar Azpilicueta 7Branislav Ivanovic 8Tomas Kalas 8Ashley Cole 7John Obi Mikel 7Nemanja Matic 6Frank Lampard 7Mohamed Salah 6Andre Schurrle 6Demba Ba 7Willian 6 (substitute) Next Simon Mignolet 6Glen Johnson 6Martin Skrtel 6Mamadou Sakho 6Jon Flanagan 5Lucas Leiva 6Joe Allen 6Steven Gerrard 5Philippe Coutinho 6Raheem Sterling 7Luis Suarez 6Daniel Sturridge 5 (substitute) Mark Schwarzer 7Cesar Azpilicueta 7Branislav Ivanovic 8Tomas Kalas 8Ashley Cole 7John Obi Mikel 7Nemanja Matic 6Frank Lampard 7Mohamed Salah 6Andre Schurrle 6Demba Ba 7Willian 6 (substitute) A fortnight earlier Gerrard stood at the centre of a group huddle urging the team forward after the epic victory over Manchester City. Sunday’s tears formed no part of pre-match considerations in the minds of those migrating towards this great footballing temple. And the support Rodgers offered was not the kind he ever thought would be required. “Steven is a boy who has picked up this club so many times. He was doing everything he possibly could today and we hoped there would be one or two who would step up to the plate instead of him, but we couldn’t quite do that today. “There’s certainly no blame because we are in the position we are in now because of him. It could have happened to anyone. This is a guy that is so strong mentally.” This was the day when it seemed the championship would return to Anfield. The clouds sitting atop the rest of the country parted portentously to let the sun in. The streets around the stadium were full three hours before kick-off, T-shirted supporters from all corners of the world it seemed basking in the spring warmth and a sense of euphoria not felt in these parts for two decades. Joe Scarborough, of “Morning Joe” fame on America’s CBS network, joined in the pre-match carnival, an emblematic superfan singing the names of his favourites as the Liverpool announcer listed their heroes. The years of empty yearning made Anfield fit to burst with expectation. That this was their time was writ across the beaming faces of a support already polishing the Premier League pot. Defeat was not an option in this dreamscape but that is what they got, hit over the head with a lead pipe by the most parsimonious of opponents. Mourinho has made larceny an art wherever he has managed. He lauded his team’s performance as “fantastic”. And while it is difficult to argue with the forensic nature of the performance, it is fair to point out there was little joy in it for the purist. For Rodgers it was a strike against all he holds dear. “Jose will look at the result and say he won the game. But that is not my philosophy. We were the team with the ball trying to win the game. I like my players to express themselves, to attack the opposition, to play with imagination and pace. We couldn’t break them down on this occasion, but we regroup and prepare for the next game at Crystal Palace,” he said. “It is amazing to think that we go into the final two games two points clear of a club like Chelsea with all the money they have spent. I’m so proud of every one of my players. We have two games to go and we will try to win them.” After 11 successive victories the unexpected set-back was always going to happen, and who better than Mourinho to deliver the bad news. The result reinforces the view of the Chelsea manager as the über coach; even shorn of key players and full health, he pulled off a remarkable result when least expected. There is no right or wrong way to win a match. That much is clear. Mourinho’s way is no more or less worthy than any other, but it hardly makes the heart miss a beat. The great Dutch side of the 1970s, the Mighty Magyars of the 1950s both failed to win the World Cup but both live on in the memories of those that saw them and in the collective psyche of the game. They left us with tales and recollections of Puskas and Cruyff, of Hidegkuti and Neeskens, of a way of seeing that inspires. What do Mourinho’s teams leave us with? A sense of grudging respect, of admiration for blood spilled and effort spent, but no great desire to buy a ticket. Rodgers is firmly of the Magyar/Dutch school. Through the range and power of his coaching he has made quick-footed raiders like Raheem Sterling and Philippe Coutinho effective team players. He has remodelled Gerrard into a deep-lying midfielder in middle footballing age and brought Luis Suarez back into the family. All these are considerable gains in the moulding of a team that has already yielded more fruit than any expected. Manchester City’s victory at Palace made it a deeply painful afternoon but the season is not done yet, and whichever way the dice fall in May, Rodgers has a platform to go again in 2015.
It's all very well Brendan saying we'd never player like Chelsea, but my point is that we couldn't even if we wanted to: we just don't have the players or organisation, imho. Brendan (and Bobby across the park) need to address that I think for next season. Everton do have a better defence and personnel for that, but Martinez inherited that rather than developed it. We haven't had it since Benitez (remember the CL quarter against Juve in Turin, 2005?). I can't be a hypocrite and write on here that we should have gone out to play for a draw, as I said before the game that better sides than ours have tried that and blew up (1989, for instance), so it was RIGHT to try and win it. As dave says though, we don't have the experience or patience, especially at Anfield, to draw out the opponents, and we panic if we're not three or four up by halftime. Still wouldn't change this season from the last few years though!
