Smith.
- Thread starter James
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Rodgers is funny like that with youngsters, remember Suso getting his debut against the mancs at Anfield.
He basically throws them in at the deepend, surely it makes more sense to ease these youngsters in against the likes of Hull/Stoke/Sunderland at home, give them 20 mins when we are comfartably winning.
It's a swim or sink attitude. If Smith did well, like he showed during training, then his confidence would be very high.
Let's face it if the team is winning against Hull/Stoke/Sunderland then there will always be a little doubt in some peoples eyes that Smith can't reproduce it against the bigger teams.
Top post.
Hes done it before though with Suso and there was no transfer window in sight, and theres nothing to suggest that he won't be backed in January is there?
Are people saying that Rodgers sabotaged part of the game to make a point to the owners?
He definitely had a poor game but it was hardly his fault. He got hung out to dry by BR. I wouldn't be adverse to him getting another run out against Hull presuming he played in his correct position.
I get what you are saying but it seems very unfair, basically throwing a kid to the wolves, 9 times out of 10 hes going to get eaten in that situation.
The point of giving the kids time against shite teams first when we are winning is to ease them in gradually and see if they are up to it in those games that wont cost us, if they play shite and don't look up to it then no damage done, if they do well then they get a chance against the bigger teams when the time comes, just throwing them in at the deepend like that just seems wrong.
He played worse than a Dossena, Degen, Plessis, Voronin hybrid.
Poor Djimi, he really was that bad wasnt he.
Agreed. Rodgers could just said that we have a thin squad instead of playing the kid as a message.
It was a baffling decision from Rodgers. I would've thought the obvious decision would have been to put Alberto on and keep Coutinho on the left. However, the simple fact is that it wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference who we'd put on. With Studge currently injured, there's no players outside our first team who can genuinely make a difference in a game.
He has, many times.
John Henry... 'Oh look, Brendan is giving the youngster Smith his debut, that must be a cryptic message to me that we need more players, why doesn't he just ask me?, oh he has and there will be a decent bit of cash in Jan just like there is in every window for him'
Yes in sure putting on Brad Smith was all part of a Machiavellian plan to get the board to spend on new players.
I'm certain it was nothing to do with the fact that he's a left back & Chelsea were attacking down the flanks so bringing him on would potentially tighten up wide areas while allowing Coutinho to operate more centrally where they was less need for him to track back.
Obviously....
I'm certain it was nothing to do with the fact that he's a left back & Chelsea were attacking down the flanks so bringing him on would potentially tighten up wide areas while allowing Coutinho to operate more centrally where they was less need for him to track back.
Obviously....
I think there's more to it. It's a case of showing the youngsters how much of a higher level they need to be at to make it. I suspect we won't see much of Smith now for a few weeks, while he goes off and works on his game a bit more and hopefully we'll see an improved player after that.
These are not the games to be throwing youngsters into the mix. Sink or swim situations are rarely helpful for them. Besides, we've had enough comfortable victories this season to bed our youngsters in. I'd like to think this was a bit of a political move from Rodgers, otherwise it was just daft.
In fact, I'm inclined to think it was daft whatever the scenario.
In fact, I'm inclined to think it was daft whatever the scenario.
Yep, its not like Rodgers has never thrown a player in at the deepend before either, as mentioned he gave Suso his debut against the mancs and also Sterling against City 2nd game of last season, that might of been Sterlings full debut to, can't remember him starting under Kenny.
Kenny gave Raheem his first league game.
I know.
Cant be arsed to look but im pretty sure Sterlings first start was under Rodgers, Kenny was frustrating in that he didn't give players a chance when it was clear our season was a write off, remember Sterling getting 10 minutes here and 5 minutes there and that was about it.
I didn't say it was sink or swim, I think it was sink only. He was playing the long game with him, I'm not saying it was right or wrong but I have a feeling we'll see others thrown in the deep end in big games in the hope it'll be to their, and our, long term benefit.
Right before the September transfer window, I thought there was something similar happening:
Aston Villa vs Liverpool (Saturday 5.30pm)
Aston Villa vs Liverpool (Saturday 5.30pm)
I am starting to wonder if the lack of substitutions by Rodgers is in part a subtle message to the owners about the need to strengthen the team.
rurikbird, Aug 24, 2013
If Rodgers is risking a result to make a point then he wants his head caving in.
Sheik Yerbouti, Aug 24, 2013He fucking isnt. Dont listen to these bing bongs ffs.
Herr Onceared, Aug 24, 2013- Status
