I said that at the match. This is probably the first time in over half a century both sides are shiteThis is also one of the worst Liverpool sides I can remember though.
I said that at the match. This is probably the first time in over half a century both sides are shiteThis is also one of the worst Liverpool sides I can remember though.
True. Sadly, very true.
I don't agree. We were worse under Souness and definitely under Hodgson.
He should have started with Benteke
Subs too late for starters.
Nah. Under Hodgson we had Torres, Gerrard, Reina. All three were on a downward slope but still better than the options we have now. Hodgson was a shit manager. But the first team was better than this.
I don't agree. We were worse under Souness and definitely under Hodgson.
On paper yes, in practice no. That team would never have stuck four on Manchester City at the Etihad.
Difficult to say. I am sure Klopp would have preferred that squad over this.
I thought Can gave an accomplished performance as wellLucas had a great game, 6.5 my arse.
Lucas had a great game, 6.5 my arse.
I thought Can gave an accomplished performance as well
If you're talking about the full squad, I'm not sure Klopp would.
When you compare the best players on Hodgson's team to the best players now, yeah, that team has a good edge:
--- Reina, Torres, Gerrard, Carra, Agger, Johnson, Kuyt -vs-
--- Sturridge, Henderson, Can, Coutinho, Clyne, ... I'm struggling to find more names I could put here
However, when you go beyond that though (I'm taking out the likes of Lucas and Skrtel who played on both teams):
Hodgson would count on the likes of Meireles, Maxi, Aurelio, Kelly, Cole, Kyrgiakos, Spearing, Konchesky, Poulsen, N'gog, and Jovanovic.
The current team after the best 5 players has Milner, Moreno, Sakho, Lovren, Gomez, Flanagan, Allen, Lallana, Ibe, Firmino, Ings and Origi. There's just no compare in this section.
ps. My eyes bleed at the sight of some of those names in Hodgson's team. There's some seriously fucked up shit in that squad.
Considering my MoTM got 7, and he and Clyne got 6.5 - I don't really get your point ... he was the 2nd best player on the pitch for us ... and we were not that good overall. Should I just give him a 9 as he had a great game? Nah, didn't think so.
I don't relate to your personal ratings average, I'm saying Lucas was better than that. And if your alternative to 6.5 is 9? It's not that precise, is it.