Post-match Madrid Talk

[Gerry_A_Trick]

I doubt any of the top 10 sides in the PL could tell you exactly what their best side is because it will vary with form and the type of opposition they are facing. It's no longer an 11 man team per se but more like 14-15. So on that basis some of the players from last night emphasised their right to be considered in that Top 15.

We made 7 changes from the weekend, which means it's at least an 18 man game.

 

[ILD]

Are people going a bit OTT branding the term 'weakened team' about? I noticed macca using the word 'replacements' which is better word to describe the players who came into the side. We didn't play the reserves or virtual unknowns. The majority on here have pleaded with Roger's to drop Johnson and Lovren. He did. Same goes for Balotelli. Did those three changes weaken us that much or did he bring in players who would bust a gut for us?

On paper, the omission of Henderson, Gerrard and Sterling stuck out like a sore thumb. That's fair enough and I would have played them myself but I don't think it's fair to accuse Rogers of throwing in the towel. He didn't put out a team expecting to lose or wanting to lose. The team he picked focused on ball retention and protection to the back four. I'm sure his game plan was to keep it simple, keep the ball moving quickly and provide an energetic shield for the back four. He then had the option of adding guile to the team (Gerrard, Sterling and Coutinho) in the second half which is exactly what happened.

Should we give Roger's the benefit of the doubt here? It might read as spin but did he mix up the team as we were in a rut and needed players to come in and work their socks off?

 

[ILD]

"

Yes, it makes most sense to me as a message from Rodgers that he felt pretty disgusted by the performance at Newcastle, following on from other ineffectual performances, and basically was more about punishing those left out than it was about genuinely rewarding those who came in. And I can sympathise with his disappointment. But as you say, it leaves us in a negative state. We surely don't know any better what our first XI should be, and we surely don't have any serious cause for optimism in terms of our ability to recover the form of last season.

Is it not both? Player off form or in a rut should sit out and others should be giving a chance.

 

[gkmacca]

I doubt any of the top 10 sides in the PL could tell you exactly what their best side is because it will vary with form and the type of opposition they are facing. It's no longer an 11 man team per se but more like 14-15. So on that basis some of the players from last night emphasised their right to be considered in that Top 15.

That's obvious. But I bet Mourinho knows what team is, in general terms, his best, and what his best options are. You don't need to think in terms of a rigidly fixed eleven, of course you'll change as and when it's needed, but the point is you'll know how to send out your most dangerous team against the top clubs. You make shrewd decisions about those players who represent a top class option; you don't just give anyone else available a chance, especially not in a big game in a tournament that you've spent so long claiming is so important to be in and progress in and showcase your ability to the football world. If you've got Chelski's squad, you could juggle about 15 easily, but you'll know which ones they are. There are top players banging on the door. We don't have top players banging on the door. The best we can manage is a few so-so players creosoting the door. I don't know how many more commentators and ex-players, and even current players need to say it before this forum stops trying to make out it's some isolated and unjustified personal gripe: you don't go to a huge club, for a big game, and 'assess' your second or third choices. People can spin it however they like, for whatever reason, but it's not what Liverpool Football Club does, and I just hope that one of the semi-detached executives we now have in charge understands that and makes it known internally.

 

[SummerOnions]

Are people going a bit OTT branding the term 'weakened team' about? I noticed macca using the word 'replacements' which is better word to describe the players who came into the side. We didn't play the reserves or virtual unknowns. The majority on here have pleaded with Roger's to drop Johnson and Lovren. He did. Same goes for Balotelli. Did those three changes weaken us that much or did he bring in players who would bust a gut for us?

On paper, the omission of Henderson, Gerrard and Sterling stuck out like a sore thumb. That's fair enough and I would have played them myself but I don't think it's fair to accuse Rogers of throwing in the towel. He didn't put out a team expecting to lose or wanting to lose. The team he picked focused on ball retention and protection to the back four. I'm sure his game plan was to keep it simple, keep the ball moving quickly and provide an energetic shield for the back four. He then had the option of adding guile to the team (Gerrard, Sterling and Coutinho) in the second half which is exactly what happened.

Should we give Roger's the benefit of the doubt here? It might read as spin but did he mix up the team as we were in a rut and needed players to come in and work their socks off?

That's how I see it. Rodgers made the right decision but we don't have a striker who can score goals til Sturridge comes back. We need to find a way around that

 

[ILD]

I don't 100% agree with his team selection myself man. I would have played Gerrard and Sterling because it was Real Madrid and you play with big guns but the rest was fair game.

 

[gkmacca]

Is it not both? Player off form or in a rut should sit out and others should be giving a chance.

In a minor domestic cup game, definitely, or even in the league against a lower club, yes, I'd be all for it. I don't even quite understand what Rodgers meant when he said, "I didn't see this as a big showcase game where I had to play the so-called names". It WAS a big showcase game - if he doesn't really think that he needs a slap to the system pronto. And the 'so-called' line - if he doesn't think of them as deserving that term, then why the hell has he talked them up, defended his repeated choice of them and made it very clear in deeds as well as words that they are, in his view, the best or least worst he's currently got? It's all mealy-mouthed, slippery, cynical claptrap and I'm saddened some are so desperate to leap down the rabbit hole and claim it's all logical and admirable stuff. The world won't collapse if people express doubts and voice criticisms.

 

[mark1975]

If the replacements had shown that they represented a more dynamic, incisive, dangerous option than those they replaced, then it would have given cause for encouragement. As it is, most of them showed they were either just as poor and ineffectual as the others, or a bit worse. So what it told us is that we have two sets of mediocrities in the squad, both seemingly incapable of defending properly or scoring many goals. I really don't see the point in putting a positive spin on that. It's frankly patronising for some to chastise those who express an honest sense of frustration and anxiety about this. This is a semi-private forum, not a PR department.

Not really, that's a bit selective and of the assumption that we only have problems in attack - we have an injured 20 goal a season striker yet to come back. It told us we can look alot more industrious and powerful in some areas, which I think we did and it's a big flaw in our game at present. What's patronising? Taking to task people posting selective, hyper critical nonsense? Ok. You're having a go at me for not liking peoples comments and then doing the exact same. Practice what you preach and all that, you get equally irritated with people posting differing opinions to yourself, so don't give me none of that shite.

 

[gkmacca]

No, I listen to what they say. I've based my argument on logic, you've based yours on sentiment, that's why you're getting so emotional and taking it so personally. When you get into this moaning minnie mood of yours you just have a bee buzzing in your brain telling you that you're dealing with the enemy and everything they say is just more blah blah blah. So don't give me none of THAT shite either. Go and have another long and pointless spat with Modo until you feel normal again. I'm not wasting time on this any longer.

 

[mark1975]

Ok, surely you can see the hypocrisy in calling me patronising for arguing the toss, when you made your mind up yesterday morning about what Rodgers was doing to our "legacy".

 

[Wizardry]

We didn't play possession football last year, we played counter attacking football. We've tried to play a posession style most of this year, and it hasn't worked. If we don't shoot ourselves in the foot first via some individual error defending fairly basic attacking play, teams know that they can force errors by pressing. We take risks in posession in defense, without them leading to goal scoring opportunities consistently enough to warrant them. This is how any team playing this way would be at first, but with so little offensive production in the team at present, I don't think its something we'll just grow out of with current personnel.

We don't have speed in transition this year, and I don't mean on the ball speed, I mean the tempo of our passes, and the skill of our players to receive an outlet ball, turn and find a pass has been severely lacking, with the exception of Sterling earlier in the season, but that well is running dry. Coutinho should be perfectly made to fill that role, hence the brain of the team stuff from Rodgers, but he hasn't done it near enough. Lallana should be able to do that as well to a lesser extent, but has been good in spurts. If Markovich started playing more aggressively and with more confidence, or even competently at times, it would help. Today was the first time he's even shown a glimpse of quality, he's been cowardly, and I'd love to see more direct play from him and a bit of confidence. He could still lack in quality and not work out, but we'll never know if he hides.

Then there's the runs ahead, when we do break. Sometimes there are passes on, and we aren't making them, sometimes we are making the wrong decisions, but often our forwards aren't making those runs. Balotelli has looked better starting attacks than he has on the shoulder of the last defender. He hasn't had a career in any way defined by scoring frequently on the break, and sometimes he isn't making those runs. Whatever else the limitations Borini has, he runs well off the ball, with intelligence. Lambert will never function on a team that is trying to play on the counter.

When we do actually gain the opposition third, and play with any intensity, which is for maybe 5 minutes of a given game, if that, we do show that there is skill in the side. We do have midfielders who can pass and move, we do have aggressive runners, and this year, finally, we have competent fullbacks on both sides. The amount of times they can comfortably push up and take the wide channels isn't enough, and the risk we take on to get there isn't worth it at present. It's all about adjusting the balance.

What's strange about this balance thing is that Rodgers last year said fuck it and went for a very aggressive way of playing at the expense of defense, and now we see us lacking in goal production throughout the side, with no understanding in forward play, and instead of risking an extra forward, he's gone all conservative. There's zero of the fear factor that gave us so much space last year. And we still leak goals. He seems to have more confidence in the idea that he can make us defend tighter, which hasn't been the case the whole time here, than he does in us reliably getting goals with any available players. He might be right, stick 2 up front from the start and we might be more likely to ship goals than the additional chance to score one. Very likely the case against Chelsea.

See, you probably didn't even read it but that sounds very similar to what I posted in the "So, Newcastle" thread.

 

[ILD]

The world won't collapse if people express doubts and voice criticisms.

I agree. I wouldn't have played the team he did myself.

 

[Best Believe It]

I agree. I wouldn't have played the team he did myself.

I would have done it sooner. Too many players are underperforming at the moment and I certainly would have gone, well actually I'm going to give the others a chance because you lot aren't pulling up any trees.

But I wouldn't have done it against Real Madrid at the Bernabeu.

 

[Hansern]

Real have scored 3 or more goals in the last 13 home games or something.
I dont particularly agree with the entire team selection but in the end Rodgers made the right call.
Keep them at bay and work hard for 60-70 mins and then make positive changes.
Several of the players involved yesterday will get some confidence from that game.
Moreno, Mignolet, Can, Borini and Lucas.
We kept possession well and moved the ball much quicker from defence to midfield.
Our gaping hole was attacking in the final third.

We always knew we would have to win the last two to qualify.

 

[Frogfish]

That's obvious. But I bet Mourinho knows what team is, in general terms, his best, and what his best options are. You don't need to think in terms of a rigidly fixed eleven, of course you'll change as and when it's needed, but the point is you'll know how to send out your most dangerous team against the top clubs. You make shrewd decisions about those players who represent a top class option; you don't just give anyone else available a chance, especially not in a big game in a tournament that you've spent so long claiming is so important to be in and progress in and showcase your ability to the football world. If you've got Chelski's squad, you could juggle about 15 easily, but you'll know which ones they are. There are top players banging on the door. We don't have top players banging on the door. The best we can manage is a few so-so players creosoting the door. I don't know how many more commentators and ex-players, and even current players need to say it before this forum stops trying to make out it's some isolated and unjustified personal gripe: you don't go to a huge club, for a big game, and 'assess' your second or third choices. People can spin it however they like, for whatever reason, but it's not what Liverpool Football Club does, and I just hope that one of the semi-detached executives we now have in charge understands that and makes it known internally.

Well you could spin it that way .. or you could view it exactly as ILD perfectly laid out just above your post. I don't know the whys and wherefores, I'm sure only Rodgers and Pascoe really know. Was it a game-plan to start that way and then bring on the 'big-guns' with 20 mins to go ? I suggested that was a possibility in the pre-game thread but of course it was just a wild guess. Of course you can hardly believe what any manager says in the pre-game build-up, they are all trying to con or psych out their opposite.

RM have won 26 of their last 30 matches at home (last season and this, counting only La Liga and CL as I don't know about the minor Spanish cups), won their last 12 matches in all competitions on the bounce, are the current European Champions and considered the best team in the world at present, and beat us 3-0 at Anfield just 2 weeks ago ... were there any realistic expectations, even with whatever people consider to be our 'best lineup' for even a point ?
Most people, outside of Liverpool and our fans, expects/expected RM to win 6/6 in this group. As I said earlier above, at least this is now in our own hands, draw at Ludo and beat Basel (it will be tough as it will virtually be a knock-out match but we should win at Anfield) and we qualify (bar Basel beating RM, in which case we need 2 wins and to beat Basel by 2 goals).

Rodgers paid good money for most of those players so I guess he's entitled to believe that they are worthy of starting in the 1st team. Fact is the players performed pretty well and had Gerrard, Sterling and Coutinho brought anything to the party in the last 20 mins we might be congratulating ourselves on a hard-earned draw .. or better, who knows, in the last few minutes of the game anything could have happened. Unfortunately it didn't but whose fault, if we can call it a fault bearing in mind the quality of the opposition, is that ?

 

[Dirkus_Circus]

KOLO, MAN OF THE MATCH, KOLO KOLO MAN OF THE MATCH

you're a bunch of weird feckers here, we play like shite and everyones sunshines and lollipops then we unfortunately lose but look pretty fucking good, especially in defence, and people are hanging from the rafters

You've been on SCM for 3 years now and you aren't used to this yet?

 

[OLD_Lewy]

You've been on SCM for 3 years now and you aren't used to this yet?

I'm usually one of the grumpy bellends to be fair

 

[Ossi]

Markovic first touch and ball control is really really bad.
Manquillo is only rated because he cost 0. He got raped all night yesterday.
Lallana doesn't seem to be very wise on the pitch- he just runs.
Cans passing is not very good.

Can we find back to the way were our forwards ran in the channels, pressed at the right time and showed some kind of spirit?

 

[gkmacca]

Well you could spin it that way .. or you could view it exactly as ILD perfectly laid out just above your post.

Fair enough. I think, though, the former is what I'll do, seeing as I did it.

 

[Frogfish]

Markovic first touch and ball control is really really bad.
Cans passing is not very good.

Can we find back to the way were our forwards ran in the channels, pressed at the right time and showed some kind of spirit?

Oh that really is SO not true ! During the match I even commented a few times, "great take" or "brilliant control". He lacks consistency but he's still a kid, give him time. Same can be said of Can, another youngster, who's passing can be sublime or ridiculous.

Agree with the channels comment.

 

[Mersey86]

If you've got Chelski's squad, you could juggle about 15 easily, but you'll know which ones they are. There are top players banging on the door. We don't have top players banging on the door. The best we can manage is a few so-so players creosoting the door.

That is class.

 

[gkmacca]

Tony Barrett

Once you move beyond the overemotive language and accusations ranging from a betrayal of heritage to waving the white flag, one truth remains: neither Liverpool’s prospects of qualifying for the knockout stage of the Champions League nor their lustre as a club was enhanced by Brendan Rodgers’s selection policy.

The debate has many facets and it is easy to see the merit in the arguments of those who point out that Liverpool’s performance was competitive, and that a number of those left out are not playing well enough to be guaranteed starters.

But for Liverpool not to field their strongest XI for a game of such magnitude is a startling indictment of where the club are at — and one that Rodgers should have avoided.

Two weeks earlier, Real Madrid took on Liverpool at Anfield less than 72 hours before the biggest fixture of the season in Spain, against Barcelona, and Carlo Ancelotti picked his best available team without hesitation. Put in a similar situation on Tuesday, Rodgers took the opposite route, even though his team have a day’s more recovery time than Chelsea, their opponents on Saturday in a game that is clearly the Liverpool manager’s priority.

Liverpool, five times European Cup winners, last season’s Barclays Premier League runners-up and spenders of almost £120 million on players this summer, took on the role of plucky underdogs, of a club who meekly accepted their fate and acted accordingly. If they have been about anything in Europe over the years, it is surely that they do not find vindication in defeat.

There are grey areas and they have to be acknowledged. Should Liverpool achieve the objectives that Rodgers has set for them by finishing in the top four of the Premier League, reaching the last 16 of the Champions League and winning silverware, any damage done by fielding a weakened team in a glamour tie will be strictly collateral. That can be judged only in the future, though, and the more immediate issue is that Rodgers has placed himself under unnecessary pressure before the Chelsea match.

Not only will his team selection come under intense scrutiny, but should Liverpool fail to produce a positive performance and result, there will be no benefits from taking on Real with a weakened team. Pushing the stakes this high was avoidable and could prove counterproductive.

 

[jexykrodic]

I had to stop reading Barrett's piece part way through that as my sides were aching from laughter. Arguing image over legitimate decision making, perception trumps pragmatism, arguing we should continue with players who've lost form and then insulting those that did play all in the name of false pride, claiming we "took on the role of plucky underdogs, of a club who meekly accepted their fate and acted accordingly" all for one game that doesn't decide anything. Really?

I had to laugh because it's such a juvenile, petulant piece. If he doesn't believe that Rodgers can manage the team and wants him replaced then say so. I'm surprised he put that out, who cares apart from Liverpool fans themselves and even they can't agree. Most people will see Real Madrid 1 Liverpool 0 and think it a close game because they won't have seen the match and don't care a fig about our clubs image - so much for "startling indictment".

 

[hmmmmm1]

It's only a weakened side if most of "rested" players don't start on the weekend, for which most people agree shouldn't probably start bar sterling/gerrard.

 

[Gerry_A_Trick]

It's only a weakened side if most of "rested" players don't start on the weekend, for which most people agree shouldn't probably start bar sterling/gerrard.

It was a weakened side because most of the players that have played most games for us didn't start, and it wasn't because they were injured. If Rodgers had thought people should be dropped, why did he wait until playing the best team in Europe before doing it, and then drop them all at once?

But, it happens to have nearly paid off, so Rodgers got lucky.

 

[mark1975]

What makes me laugh is these jouno's are one minute laying into Rodger's signings as failures, a waste of money. Then he puts out a team that includes a few of them, and he's accused of fielding a reserve side. Can, Markovic and Lallana, three new players who are included in this so called "weakened/not our strongest XI" side, cost £50m between them and are included in the general criticisms that have been leveled at the manager. He drops Mario and Lovren, two new players who arguably deserve the "bad signings" flack, and he's called fit to burn.

Basically the crux of this is that he dropped Gerrard, the unforgivable. Argue that it was done in the wrong game, fair enough, but if we're banking on a player who hasn't scored or assisted in open play for God knows how long and has been the subject of both fan and neutral criticism for sometime now, then we really are fucked.

 

[gkmacca]

If they call certain signings failures and a waste of money, and then complain about them playing, that doesn't actually sound at all contradictory. But if it makes you laugh...

 

[keniget]

I think people are (purposely?) confusing the issue. It's not necessarily the fact that certain players were dropped, it's was the scale and obvious nature of the changes and the message it sent out.

I can appreciate that some might people might not view it as terribly offensive, that's cool, but to try and explain it all away as pragmatism based on poor performances of first choice players or anything else... wow.

 

[Wizardry]

Markovic first touch and ball control is really really bad.
Manquillo is only rated because he cost 0. He got raped all night yesterday.
Lallana doesn't seem to be very wise on the pitch- he just runs.
Cans passing is not very good.

Can we find back to the way were our forwards ran in the channels, pressed at the right time and showed some kind of spirit?

Very blunt but mostly fair. I'd argue that Markovic does have a good first touch but he's overawed right now. I think Lallana does more than just run but he's still finding his feet a little.

 

[Delinquent]

I had to stop reading Barrett's piece part way through that as my sides were aching from laughter. Arguing image over legitimate decision making, perception trumps pragmatism, arguing we should continue with players who've lost form and then insulting those that did play all in the name of false pride, claiming we "took on the role of plucky underdogs, of a club who meekly accepted their fate and acted accordingly" all for one game that doesn't decide anything. Really?

I had to laugh because it's such a juvenile, petulant piece. If he doesn't believe that Rodgers can manage the team and wants him replaced then say so. I'm surprised he put that out, who cares apart from Liverpool fans themselves and even they can't agree. Most people will see Real Madrid 1 Liverpool 0 and think it a close game because they won't have seen the match and don't care a fig about our clubs image - so much for "startling indictment".

There is a difference between criticizing the manager and calling for his head. I wish people could make that distinction. And anyone who hasn't been living in a cave will have seen or heard about Rodger's team selection and the reaction to it. It doesn't reflect well on Rodgers or the club, and if you believe his explanation for it then you're away with the fairies.