Where to start with this one?
Firstly let’s take the stick with which Rafa Benitez has been beaten black and blue this season and say that stick, or Alberto Aquilani as it is more commonly known, showed real quality and looked like a player worth his price tag. Not only was his timely goal exquisitely taken but he was the real creative hub of the team for much of the first 90 minutes. Inevitably, he ran out of steam as playing 90 minutes is not a requirement he has much recent experience of. If the little Italian can reproduce this form consistently next season (and play regularly) what a player Liverpool could have.
Secondly, for a supposedly negative manager, that was about the best starting line up any manager could have selected in the circumstances so let’s give Rafa some credit for a positive approach.
Thirdly, Lucas was bloody magnificent last night and anyone who refuses to acknowledge that is a complete and total berk.
Now I’m going to slip into whinge-mode. Liverpool had a 90-minute window to score an away goal. Atletico had a 120-minute window to score an away goal. Liverpool scored one away goal in 90 minutes. Atletico scored no away goals in their first 90 minutes but got one in the next 30 minutes. Liverpool’s away goal was wrongly disallowed for offside. Atletico’s wasn’t. Atletico progressed on the away goals rule.
The away goals rule gives a crucial incentive to away teams to compete in the first legs of knock-out cup ties and I completely support the concept. However, that rule should not count in extra-time as it clearly gives one team a significant advantage. You could argue that as the home team, Liverpool would have had an advantage over Atletico in extra-time but I would ask why do you need extra time? We played 90 minutes in Madrid and 90 minutes at Anfield. Why not go straight to penalties? No one wants extra-time. The law is an ass!
As for the decision to disallow what could have been a vital away goal for us last week, given how our season has gone, it is no surprise that a crucial decision went against us when the stakes were highest. That doesn’t make it anymore palpable though. Nor does the fact that in the two days leading up to this tie, we saw some rotten refereeing decisions lead to the elimination of both Lyon and Barcelona in the Champions League semi-finals. At least we can see that inept refereeing affects all teams in Europe and not just us – something you can’t say of the Premiership this season.
Overall, you have to feel hard done by. Robbed even. Were we magnificent in Madrid? No. Did we score as many legitimate goals as Atletico in that game? Yes. Should we have taken an away goal into last night’s game? Yes.
There’s no excuse for the decision to disallow Benayoun’s goal in Madrid. It was quite simply a wrong decision. Football should be won by the team that scores the most goals. That is the concept the entire game is based on. Liverpool scored two goals over 180 minutes and Atletico scored just one. Over 210 minutes, Liverpool scored three goals and Atletico scored two. OK, had Benayoun’s goal in Madrid not been disallowed, we would have seen a different approach from Atletico and potentially a very different outcome but the point is, if a team achieves its objective of scoring but is not given any reward or credit for doing so, what is the point in the game?
The raison d’être for a football referee is to enforce the rules of the game. By disallowing a legitimate goal, the referee did the exact opposite. Something has to change as it is clear that referees and their assistants are not equipped to handle the pace, tactics, theatrics and cynicism of the modern game and thanks to technology, incorrect decisions are quickly exposed.
Given the number of incorrect decisions that have decisively gone against Liverpool FC this season, I feel I can say that football is no longer decided by what 11 men achieve with a football and is instead decided by the decisions of the referee.
Referee rant over, the other key reason we went out of the Europa League last night is that we had no strength in reserve. With Torres, Aurelio, Skrtel and Insua injured, Maxi Rodriguez cup-tied, Riera in disgrace and Ngog barely fit enough for the bench, Rafa fielded his strongest and most-attacking XI even though it utilised a right-back at left-back, a central midfielder at right-back and a striker-turned-midfielder as a midfielder-turned-striker. That team was good enough to win the game in 90 minutes but to get through extra-time, clearly we needed some fresh legs. Who was on the bench? Cavalieri, Kyrgiakos, Ayala, Degen, Pacheco, El Zahr and Ngog. Ayala, Pacheco and Ngog are kids. El Zahr is also young but clearly not of Premiership standard. Degen is pure shit. Only Kyrgiakos and Ngog of the outfield players could be considered first team players and Ngog has probably played too much this campaign.
Could you imagine Spurs, Villa or Man City, let alone Arsenal, Chelsea or the dirty Mancs ever having such a poor bench in a European Semi-Final? The worst thing about it, is had everyone been fit, you would have expected Torres and Aurelio to start with Johnson at right-back, Mascher back in midfield, Kuyt on the right and Benayoun on the left. I could see Babel and Aquilani being on the bench which adds some strength but it still would have been a bench of Cavalieri, Skrtel, Insua, Degen, Aquilani, Babel and Ngog. Spurs have the likes of Crouch and Eidur Gudjohnsson on their bench. City have Santa-Cruz plus one of Adebayor, Bellamy or Tevez and have let Robinho go out on loan! We simply haven’t got a strong enough squad.
We need a quality left-back, a decent back up for right-back, a winger with real quality (possibly two), and at least one more striker plus replacements for any first team players who are sold in the summer. It is a massive rebuilding task.
Rafa must be given money to spend this summer or the chances of us reaching a fifth European Semi-Final in seven years are slim to none.
Final, final point: I’m so proud of the players who did play last night. They gave their all and despite going out, we can hold our heads up high and won’t be afraid of the dark.
Friday, 30 April 2010
Friday, 23 April 2010
Should Rafa stay or go?
Assuming it is our (the club’s) choice and not Benitez’s (after all why should a top manager like him stay where he is not appreciated, respected or given a realistic chance to be successful), on what should we base a decision on whether to fire him or retain his services?
Should we let the increasingly anti-Benitez Kop magazine convince us that fourth place is the “minimum acceptable target” and therefore the likely failure to achieve that target is just cause to dispense with the services of the manager who brought us closer to winning the League last season than in any of the previous nineteen seasons? Or should we accept that having the fifth most expensive squad and the fifth most expensive wage bill (by big margins) means that to finish above fifth would be an achievement?
I believe that statement about fourth being the “minimum acceptable target” was first uttered by Rick Parry during the 2002-03 season and was repeated throughout 2003-04 which proved to be Houllier’s final season. Given it looks certain we will miss out on that target this campaign, as someone who wanted Houllier sacked (or to quit) by the summer of 2004, I have to ask should I judge Rafa by the same standards and therefore call for him or has the game changed making that standard irrelevant six years later?
When Houllier failed to achieve the “minimum acceptable target” in 2002-03, he was not sacked. People reasoned that the man had led us a treble of cups in 2000-01 and to runners-up spot in the League in 2001-02 and that he therefore deserved a shot at redemption. He had not been forced to sell a key midfielder during the summer of 2002 (though he released Redknapp and McAllister for free) and certainly had not been restricted in terms of spending money with £10m splashed out on “striker” El Hadji Diouf as well as a further £8.4m on midfielders Diao and Cheyrou. What was particularly significant about the signing of Diouf was that Houllier chose not to sign Nicolas Anelka and went for Diouf instead. He made a decision that was far from obvious (and with hindsight far from sane) and the board backed him 100%. Really Houllier could blame no one but himself for the deterioration in 2002-03. Houllier simply shipped out more quality than he brought in turning a strong squad into a weaker squad that was over-reliant on a minority of quality players.
By comparison, the reasons for the deterioration in Benitez’s squad from last season to this can clearly be attributed to the departures of Robbie Keane, Xabi Alonso, Alvaro Arbeloa and Sami Hyypia without adequate replacements. Recent signings such as Albert Riera and Sotirios Kyrgiakos were bought only because Benitez was priced out of moves for his preferred targets. Meanwhile, when Rafa wanted to replace Alonso with Gareth Barry, he was overruled. Maybe that decision would have been as foolish as Houllier’s decision to replace Anelka with Diouf but I would guess that had Rafa been backed, Barry would still be in the team now (having had a year to adapt) whereas now we have neither Alonso nor Barry. The point is, Rafa wasn’t backed so he can’t be blamed for the team being so much weaker without Alonso.
If Houllier was given another year after under-achieving so much with so few mitigating circumstances in 2002-03, surely it would be only fair to give Rafa the chance to prove this season was blip given how many mitigating circumstances he could site?
Making a comparison between this season and the final season under Houllier (2003-04), how similar are the circumstances that led to Houllier’s dismissal to those that some claim should see his successor experience the same fate?
In 2003-04, Liverpool finished fourth and qualified for the Champions League. This season it now looks highly unlikely that we will achieve the same feat. However, in 2003-04 there was less competition than now. That season Liverpool’s closest rivals for fourth were Newcastle, Aston Villa and Charlton Athletic who finished with 56, 56 and 53 points respectively. Neither had been backed by a Billionaire Sheikh or possessed squads of the strength of Man City and Spurs in 2009-10. In ’03-04, 59 points was enough to mathematically guarantee fourth place. This season it wouldn’t get close. Liverpool already have 59 points this season with three games remaining and could still finish as low as 7th.
Back then, Liverpool were financially superior or at least equal to their nearest rivals for fourth place which is definitely not the case in 2010. By my calculations, Spurs’ net net spend in the last four transfer windows has been £39.1m, Villa’s was £67.4m and City’s a whopping £238.2m. The exact figures can be disputed as the media constantly distorts or guesses at transfer fees but the club’s net spends will be close. Liverpool’s net spend during the same four transfer windows equals a profit of £2.6m. In other words, while our current rivals for fourth place have been heavily investing in their squads, Liverpool has been standing still and even going backwards.
Just the other day I heard ESPN’s “football expert” Craig Burley dismissing the lack of money for Benitez to spend as an excuse saying “It’s not like there hasn’t been money to spend... He’s been able to spend £20m on a player.” As usual, the lack of anything functioning between Burley’s ears means he has missed the point that in order to buy a £20m player, Benitez had to sell a £30m player.
Despite this, we continually hear from the media that this has been a season of underachievement for Liverpool Football Club. If we were comfortably above Villa, Spurs and City at this stage of the season as the media seem to expect us to be, would that mean that this has been a season of underachievement for those other teams instead? In fact, I would argue that even if City take fourth place, this has been a season of underachievement for them given the vast sums invested in their squad over the last three seasons. As usual though, Liverpool is assessed according to its history and its recent over-achievements under the management of Rafael Benitez.
Under Houllier, our achievements were actually par for the course given our financial position relative to those of our rivals. Even the unprecedented treble was actually achieved at the expense of a Premiership campaign that would otherwise have been deemed acceptable. Our much (over) celebrated Champions League qualification that season was achieved with just 69 points. Only twice since then would that total have secured third place and that points tally was about average for a season under Roy Evans who was deemed inadequate for the job.
Going back to comparing 2003-04 with the current season, it should be noted that 2003-04 was not an isolated disappointing season but followed a campaign in which we finished fifth with 64 points. By comparison, this season bucks the trends of recent seasons under Benitez and follows our best season (League-wise) under him.
Rafa’s critics claim he makes baffling decisions such as recently substituting Torres at Birmingham or regularly playing Lucas ahead of Aquilani. Torres’ subsequent operation has actually vindicated Rafa’s handling of him as clearly the player was struggling with fitness and those of us who watched Birmingham game could see Torres was having no positive impact on the game whatsoever. Meanwhile, despite his critics, Lucas has improved considerably over the last season and a half and, while I still don’t think a team can challenge for the top prizes with him as a virtual ever-present, I’ve seen nothing to suggest the opposite is true of Aquilani. I can at least see some logic in these decisions which was not the case under Rafa’s predecessor. In 2003-04, Houllier seemed to persisting with utilising the likes of Heskey and Diouf as wingers because he stubbornly did not want to admit that the club’s two most expensive signings bought by him to play as strikers were actually not very good. Meanwhile, the less said about persisting with Biscan at centre-half for virtually a whole season, the better.
Has Rafa been playing Torres on a wing or selecting Lucas at centre-half? No. If anything, his team selections this season have been less surprising and more predictable than in any of previous campaign under him.
Then there is zonal marking. Given how frequently this tactic is used as a stick to beat Rafa with, it was amazing to hear that Liverpool have had the best defensive record in the Premiership this calendar year and that Reina is now in pole position to win the Golden Glove Award for most Premiership clean sheets for the fifth time in six seasons at Anfield. If zonal marking is such a liability, how can we have consistently one of the best defences in the league? Yet apparently it is madness and Rafa needs to ditch it, etc.
It tells a story that Rafa Benitez’s services are still in demand by top European clubs with Juventus strongly linked and Real Madrid’s reported interest never waning. Who wanted Houllier in 2004? Exactly. The man was out of work for a year after being sacked by Liverpool and despite a brief and comparatively successful spell at Lyon, he has hardly been deluged with offers since.
The British media and even a proportion of Liverpool fans might not respect Rafa’s achievements in management, but abroad his stock remains high.
Both Houllier and Rafa can pinpoint injuries to key players in 2003-04 and this season respectively as key negative factors on their seasons. Of course, Houllier did blame injuries whereas Rafa, despite having every justification has not. In 2003-04, Houllier was without Owen, Baros, Hamann, Carragher, Henchoz and Smicer for lengthy spells during the season. This season we’ve had lengthy absences for Torres, Gerrard, Skrtel, Aurelio, Riera, Babel, Aquilani and Johnson but crucially these have often coincided with less serious injuries to other players meaning some ridiculously under-strength teams had to be fielded. Degen in midfield, anyone? Had Diouf, Heskey, Cheyrou, Biscan and Diao not been so poor, Liverpool could have coped far better without Owen, Baros and Hamann. Meanwhile, Carra was still utilised at full-back then so Finnan and Riise should have been good enough to replace him and it was purely down to Houllier that Biscan was utilised at centre-half instead of Traore. Houllier’s squad had numbers but not quality because he replaced decent players with substandard ones. Rafa has never had the money to buy quality in depth and lost three quality players against his wishes last summer. Ultimately, you can’t blame the manager for injuries to key players but unlike Benitez, Houllier should have had more quality in reserve given the money he was given to invest.
I’ve seen a few sports channels comparing the starting XI in Houllier’s final match at home to Newcastle in 2004 with XIs fielded by Benitez this campaign and suggesting that Houllier’s team was arguably stronger. Firstly, it needs to be pointed out that the line up for Houllier’s final match was probably the strongest XI he had unlike the Benitez XIs it has been compared to, and Houllier’s XI was certainly not the XI he regularly selected throughout that season – otherwise his team may well have done better and the Frenchman may have kept his job. Houllier’s XI that day featured: Dudek, Finnan, Hyypia, Carragher, Riise, Murphy, Gerrard, Hamann, Kewell, Heskey and Owen. His most used XI featured Biscan instead of Finnan and Diouf instead of Murphy which certainly weakens the argument. I thought it would be interesting to compare Houllier’s XI versus Newcastle (which as I’ve said it probably the strongest XI Houllier had that season) with what is arguably Rafa’s strongest XI this season and I’ve added squad members who also would also be regarded as the strongest players outside the first XI. For each position, I wanted to judge which player based on their form in 2003-04 or 2009-10 respectively, I would want in our squad for 2010-11. For the 2003-04 squad, I have had to disregard what I know they went on to achieve and try to recall my views of them in the summer of 2004.
Comparison of first XIs / squads:
Dudek.....................Reina
Finnan....................Johnson
Hyypia....................Agger
Carragher..............Carragher
Riise.......................Insua
Murphy...................Mascherano
Gerrard..................Kuyt
Hamann.................Lucas
Kewell....................Babel
Heskey..................Gerrard
Owen.....................Torres
Henchoz................Skrtel
Traore...................Kyrgiakos
Biscan..................Aurelio
Smicer..................Maxi
Le Tallec...............Aquilani
Sinama.................Riera
Baros....................Ngog
Dudek was error-prone, inconsistent and unreliable. Reina is currently the best keeper in the Premiership and one of the best in the world. No contest. Reina.
I would say judging Finnan on his form from 2004-05 to 2006-07 he was a better right-back than Johnson has been in his one season at the club to date. However, in 2003-04, Finnan did little to impress and it was only under Benitez that he delivered his best form. Johnson has looked world class going forward but questionable defensively (more in terms of positionally than ability-wise) but comparing Johnson this season with Finnan in ’03-04 I would choose Johnson every time.
Hyypia is an absolute legend but ’03-04 was not his greatest season – admittedly he was hampered by having Igor Biscan alongside him for much of the campaign. Agger has the potential to become a legend and has performed well this season. Given the choice of having Hyypia aged 30 again or Agger aged 25, I simply couldn’t choose.
Carragher finished the ’03-04 season playing centre-half after Houllier belatedly accepted Biscan was not the next Beckenbauer but for much of the season and for most of his prior Liverpool career, Carra had been an underwhelming full-back who was solid defensively but offered little going forward. Obviously, hindsight tells us he became a truly great centre-half but in ’03-04, no one could have predicted that. Inevitably, Carra aged 32 has less going for him than Carra aged 26 but because we now know Carra can be and has been a world class centre-half but didn’t back then, I couldn’t choose.
Riise in ’03-04 was shocking. Despite that cannon of a left-foot, he scored zero goals and was something of a liability defensively. The following season, he massively improved under Benitez but in the summer of ’03-04, few people would have considered him good enough to play in a title-chasing team. Insua was praised to the hilt after a brief run in the team last season but this season given prolonged exposure to the first team because of Aurelio’s injuries and lack of competition from Dossena, he has come in for a lot of flack. Insua needs to improve positionally – particularly to compensate for his lack of height – and I am not convinced he will ever be good enough but despite his shortfalls (no pun intended) he has been better this season than Riise was in ’03-04 and has time on his side to improve. Discounting my knowledge of Riise’s performances in ’04-05 and ’05-06, I would edge towards Insua but this is so close I’d have to declare another tie.
In ’03-04, Hamann was at the wrong end of his career and in decline. In the two seasons following, he proved he was still capable of big performances on big occasions but Liverpool were never going to win the League with Hamann as a mainstay in central midfield going into the 2004-05 season, let alone beyond. Most supporters agree that Liverpool will not win the League with Lucas as a mainstay in central midfield either. The one thing Lucas has in his favour is his age. While being young doesn’t guarantee he will improve, comparing a 23-year old with a 31-year old experienced international is hardly fair. Honestly, I’d probably choose Hamann aged 31 than Lucas aged 23 but it is a tough, tough decision and one I could regret in three years time.
Gerrard is central-midfielder who would go onto play right-wing and later as a forward. Kuyt is a forward who would go onto play right-wing. In the summer of 2004 everyone could see that 24-year old Gerrard was our best and most influential player and was key to the club’s fortunes in the coming years. In 2009-10, supporters are divided over the merits of the industrious Kuyt and with him being aged 30, there are big questions over how long he should remain in the club’s first team. No contest, I choose Gerrard ’03-04.
Despite being many fans’ choice for Player of the Season in ’02-03 (not that we were spoilt for choice), Murphy deteriorated in ’03-04. Playing in central midfield with Gerrard as a partner, simply didn’t work as possession was too easily lost and the back four had too little protection. Despite an improvement in form during the run in (and another winner against the Mancs), ’03-04 was a disappointing year for Murphy. Mascherano started this season badly but since then has been one of our best outfield players (if not the best). Ultimately, this is a choice between the captain of Argentina and the captain of Fulham... Masch.
Kewell in ’03-04 actually had his best season for the club. Babel’s best season to date was ’07-08. Kewell started well but was poor in the second half of that season. Babel started poorly but improved in the second half of this season. Kewell never fulfilled his potential at Anfield and there is every chance Babel won’t either. I can’t separate these two.
Gerrard has been a massive disappointment in this campaign but has been outstanding for the previous decade. Heskey was a massive disappointment for most of his Liverpool career. Comparing Gerrard in 09-10 with Heskey in 03-04, I would still take Gerrard though it isn’t as clear-cut as it should be.
Torres is better than Owen in any season full stop. In fact, Torres is better than Owen and Heskey combined. Not just my opinion but backed up by the stats. In ’03-04 Owen and Heskey scored 23 goals in 65 League appearances between them; in ’09-10 Torres scored 18 in 22 appearances.
Henchoz in ’03-04 was on his last legs and Traore was crap so Skrtel and Kyrgiakos would get the nod.
Biscan was a terrible defender and something of a joke figure wherever he played so Aurelio is the better utility player (when fit).
Smicer 03-04 and Maxi 09-10 are both knocking on but Maxi is the better player and, on the evidence of this season, looks better suited to the Premiership. I’d have Maxi.
Baros missed much of the ’03-04 season due to injuries and simply not being selected after his recovery – a bit like Aquilani in ’09-10. Aquilani has better pedigree and a footballing brain whereas Baros was always something of a headless chicken. I’d choose Aquaman.
It’s hard to choose between Florent Sinama-Pongolle ’03-04 and David Ngog ’09-10. Both young, both raw, both possessing potential and both French. Sinama looked the more rounded player but his strike rate of 2 goals in 23 appearances in ’03-04 is bettered by Ngog’s 8 in 35 so far in ’09-10. Personally, I’d have Sinama but either way it’s a gamble on potential. Finally Le Tallec ’03-04 and Riera ’09-10. Both are pricks and neither are as good as they think. Take your pick or better still pick none.
So overall, the 2009-10 first XI still looks stronger (albeit not massively) than the 2003-04 team while the 2009-10 squad is stronger. There is no evidence that the team has gone backwards based on comparisons of playing staff.
How to conclude? Well my view is simple. I want Rafa to remain LFC Manager for another season at least. I would completely understand if he chose to move on but for the sake of the club, I hope he does not. Does that make me a hypocrite because I wanted Houllier out? I think I’ve proven that there were criticisms of Houllier’s performance that stand up to scrutiny so no.
Should we let the increasingly anti-Benitez Kop magazine convince us that fourth place is the “minimum acceptable target” and therefore the likely failure to achieve that target is just cause to dispense with the services of the manager who brought us closer to winning the League last season than in any of the previous nineteen seasons? Or should we accept that having the fifth most expensive squad and the fifth most expensive wage bill (by big margins) means that to finish above fifth would be an achievement?
I believe that statement about fourth being the “minimum acceptable target” was first uttered by Rick Parry during the 2002-03 season and was repeated throughout 2003-04 which proved to be Houllier’s final season. Given it looks certain we will miss out on that target this campaign, as someone who wanted Houllier sacked (or to quit) by the summer of 2004, I have to ask should I judge Rafa by the same standards and therefore call for him or has the game changed making that standard irrelevant six years later?
When Houllier failed to achieve the “minimum acceptable target” in 2002-03, he was not sacked. People reasoned that the man had led us a treble of cups in 2000-01 and to runners-up spot in the League in 2001-02 and that he therefore deserved a shot at redemption. He had not been forced to sell a key midfielder during the summer of 2002 (though he released Redknapp and McAllister for free) and certainly had not been restricted in terms of spending money with £10m splashed out on “striker” El Hadji Diouf as well as a further £8.4m on midfielders Diao and Cheyrou. What was particularly significant about the signing of Diouf was that Houllier chose not to sign Nicolas Anelka and went for Diouf instead. He made a decision that was far from obvious (and with hindsight far from sane) and the board backed him 100%. Really Houllier could blame no one but himself for the deterioration in 2002-03. Houllier simply shipped out more quality than he brought in turning a strong squad into a weaker squad that was over-reliant on a minority of quality players.
By comparison, the reasons for the deterioration in Benitez’s squad from last season to this can clearly be attributed to the departures of Robbie Keane, Xabi Alonso, Alvaro Arbeloa and Sami Hyypia without adequate replacements. Recent signings such as Albert Riera and Sotirios Kyrgiakos were bought only because Benitez was priced out of moves for his preferred targets. Meanwhile, when Rafa wanted to replace Alonso with Gareth Barry, he was overruled. Maybe that decision would have been as foolish as Houllier’s decision to replace Anelka with Diouf but I would guess that had Rafa been backed, Barry would still be in the team now (having had a year to adapt) whereas now we have neither Alonso nor Barry. The point is, Rafa wasn’t backed so he can’t be blamed for the team being so much weaker without Alonso.
If Houllier was given another year after under-achieving so much with so few mitigating circumstances in 2002-03, surely it would be only fair to give Rafa the chance to prove this season was blip given how many mitigating circumstances he could site?
Making a comparison between this season and the final season under Houllier (2003-04), how similar are the circumstances that led to Houllier’s dismissal to those that some claim should see his successor experience the same fate?
In 2003-04, Liverpool finished fourth and qualified for the Champions League. This season it now looks highly unlikely that we will achieve the same feat. However, in 2003-04 there was less competition than now. That season Liverpool’s closest rivals for fourth were Newcastle, Aston Villa and Charlton Athletic who finished with 56, 56 and 53 points respectively. Neither had been backed by a Billionaire Sheikh or possessed squads of the strength of Man City and Spurs in 2009-10. In ’03-04, 59 points was enough to mathematically guarantee fourth place. This season it wouldn’t get close. Liverpool already have 59 points this season with three games remaining and could still finish as low as 7th.
Back then, Liverpool were financially superior or at least equal to their nearest rivals for fourth place which is definitely not the case in 2010. By my calculations, Spurs’ net net spend in the last four transfer windows has been £39.1m, Villa’s was £67.4m and City’s a whopping £238.2m. The exact figures can be disputed as the media constantly distorts or guesses at transfer fees but the club’s net spends will be close. Liverpool’s net spend during the same four transfer windows equals a profit of £2.6m. In other words, while our current rivals for fourth place have been heavily investing in their squads, Liverpool has been standing still and even going backwards.
Just the other day I heard ESPN’s “football expert” Craig Burley dismissing the lack of money for Benitez to spend as an excuse saying “It’s not like there hasn’t been money to spend... He’s been able to spend £20m on a player.” As usual, the lack of anything functioning between Burley’s ears means he has missed the point that in order to buy a £20m player, Benitez had to sell a £30m player.
Despite this, we continually hear from the media that this has been a season of underachievement for Liverpool Football Club. If we were comfortably above Villa, Spurs and City at this stage of the season as the media seem to expect us to be, would that mean that this has been a season of underachievement for those other teams instead? In fact, I would argue that even if City take fourth place, this has been a season of underachievement for them given the vast sums invested in their squad over the last three seasons. As usual though, Liverpool is assessed according to its history and its recent over-achievements under the management of Rafael Benitez.
Under Houllier, our achievements were actually par for the course given our financial position relative to those of our rivals. Even the unprecedented treble was actually achieved at the expense of a Premiership campaign that would otherwise have been deemed acceptable. Our much (over) celebrated Champions League qualification that season was achieved with just 69 points. Only twice since then would that total have secured third place and that points tally was about average for a season under Roy Evans who was deemed inadequate for the job.
Going back to comparing 2003-04 with the current season, it should be noted that 2003-04 was not an isolated disappointing season but followed a campaign in which we finished fifth with 64 points. By comparison, this season bucks the trends of recent seasons under Benitez and follows our best season (League-wise) under him.
Rafa’s critics claim he makes baffling decisions such as recently substituting Torres at Birmingham or regularly playing Lucas ahead of Aquilani. Torres’ subsequent operation has actually vindicated Rafa’s handling of him as clearly the player was struggling with fitness and those of us who watched Birmingham game could see Torres was having no positive impact on the game whatsoever. Meanwhile, despite his critics, Lucas has improved considerably over the last season and a half and, while I still don’t think a team can challenge for the top prizes with him as a virtual ever-present, I’ve seen nothing to suggest the opposite is true of Aquilani. I can at least see some logic in these decisions which was not the case under Rafa’s predecessor. In 2003-04, Houllier seemed to persisting with utilising the likes of Heskey and Diouf as wingers because he stubbornly did not want to admit that the club’s two most expensive signings bought by him to play as strikers were actually not very good. Meanwhile, the less said about persisting with Biscan at centre-half for virtually a whole season, the better.
Has Rafa been playing Torres on a wing or selecting Lucas at centre-half? No. If anything, his team selections this season have been less surprising and more predictable than in any of previous campaign under him.
Then there is zonal marking. Given how frequently this tactic is used as a stick to beat Rafa with, it was amazing to hear that Liverpool have had the best defensive record in the Premiership this calendar year and that Reina is now in pole position to win the Golden Glove Award for most Premiership clean sheets for the fifth time in six seasons at Anfield. If zonal marking is such a liability, how can we have consistently one of the best defences in the league? Yet apparently it is madness and Rafa needs to ditch it, etc.
It tells a story that Rafa Benitez’s services are still in demand by top European clubs with Juventus strongly linked and Real Madrid’s reported interest never waning. Who wanted Houllier in 2004? Exactly. The man was out of work for a year after being sacked by Liverpool and despite a brief and comparatively successful spell at Lyon, he has hardly been deluged with offers since.
The British media and even a proportion of Liverpool fans might not respect Rafa’s achievements in management, but abroad his stock remains high.
Both Houllier and Rafa can pinpoint injuries to key players in 2003-04 and this season respectively as key negative factors on their seasons. Of course, Houllier did blame injuries whereas Rafa, despite having every justification has not. In 2003-04, Houllier was without Owen, Baros, Hamann, Carragher, Henchoz and Smicer for lengthy spells during the season. This season we’ve had lengthy absences for Torres, Gerrard, Skrtel, Aurelio, Riera, Babel, Aquilani and Johnson but crucially these have often coincided with less serious injuries to other players meaning some ridiculously under-strength teams had to be fielded. Degen in midfield, anyone? Had Diouf, Heskey, Cheyrou, Biscan and Diao not been so poor, Liverpool could have coped far better without Owen, Baros and Hamann. Meanwhile, Carra was still utilised at full-back then so Finnan and Riise should have been good enough to replace him and it was purely down to Houllier that Biscan was utilised at centre-half instead of Traore. Houllier’s squad had numbers but not quality because he replaced decent players with substandard ones. Rafa has never had the money to buy quality in depth and lost three quality players against his wishes last summer. Ultimately, you can’t blame the manager for injuries to key players but unlike Benitez, Houllier should have had more quality in reserve given the money he was given to invest.
I’ve seen a few sports channels comparing the starting XI in Houllier’s final match at home to Newcastle in 2004 with XIs fielded by Benitez this campaign and suggesting that Houllier’s team was arguably stronger. Firstly, it needs to be pointed out that the line up for Houllier’s final match was probably the strongest XI he had unlike the Benitez XIs it has been compared to, and Houllier’s XI was certainly not the XI he regularly selected throughout that season – otherwise his team may well have done better and the Frenchman may have kept his job. Houllier’s XI that day featured: Dudek, Finnan, Hyypia, Carragher, Riise, Murphy, Gerrard, Hamann, Kewell, Heskey and Owen. His most used XI featured Biscan instead of Finnan and Diouf instead of Murphy which certainly weakens the argument. I thought it would be interesting to compare Houllier’s XI versus Newcastle (which as I’ve said it probably the strongest XI Houllier had that season) with what is arguably Rafa’s strongest XI this season and I’ve added squad members who also would also be regarded as the strongest players outside the first XI. For each position, I wanted to judge which player based on their form in 2003-04 or 2009-10 respectively, I would want in our squad for 2010-11. For the 2003-04 squad, I have had to disregard what I know they went on to achieve and try to recall my views of them in the summer of 2004.
Comparison of first XIs / squads:
Dudek.....................Reina
Finnan....................Johnson
Hyypia....................Agger
Carragher..............Carragher
Riise.......................Insua
Murphy...................Mascherano
Gerrard..................Kuyt
Hamann.................Lucas
Kewell....................Babel
Heskey..................Gerrard
Owen.....................Torres
Henchoz................Skrtel
Traore...................Kyrgiakos
Biscan..................Aurelio
Smicer..................Maxi
Le Tallec...............Aquilani
Sinama.................Riera
Baros....................Ngog
Dudek was error-prone, inconsistent and unreliable. Reina is currently the best keeper in the Premiership and one of the best in the world. No contest. Reina.
I would say judging Finnan on his form from 2004-05 to 2006-07 he was a better right-back than Johnson has been in his one season at the club to date. However, in 2003-04, Finnan did little to impress and it was only under Benitez that he delivered his best form. Johnson has looked world class going forward but questionable defensively (more in terms of positionally than ability-wise) but comparing Johnson this season with Finnan in ’03-04 I would choose Johnson every time.
Hyypia is an absolute legend but ’03-04 was not his greatest season – admittedly he was hampered by having Igor Biscan alongside him for much of the campaign. Agger has the potential to become a legend and has performed well this season. Given the choice of having Hyypia aged 30 again or Agger aged 25, I simply couldn’t choose.
Carragher finished the ’03-04 season playing centre-half after Houllier belatedly accepted Biscan was not the next Beckenbauer but for much of the season and for most of his prior Liverpool career, Carra had been an underwhelming full-back who was solid defensively but offered little going forward. Obviously, hindsight tells us he became a truly great centre-half but in ’03-04, no one could have predicted that. Inevitably, Carra aged 32 has less going for him than Carra aged 26 but because we now know Carra can be and has been a world class centre-half but didn’t back then, I couldn’t choose.
Riise in ’03-04 was shocking. Despite that cannon of a left-foot, he scored zero goals and was something of a liability defensively. The following season, he massively improved under Benitez but in the summer of ’03-04, few people would have considered him good enough to play in a title-chasing team. Insua was praised to the hilt after a brief run in the team last season but this season given prolonged exposure to the first team because of Aurelio’s injuries and lack of competition from Dossena, he has come in for a lot of flack. Insua needs to improve positionally – particularly to compensate for his lack of height – and I am not convinced he will ever be good enough but despite his shortfalls (no pun intended) he has been better this season than Riise was in ’03-04 and has time on his side to improve. Discounting my knowledge of Riise’s performances in ’04-05 and ’05-06, I would edge towards Insua but this is so close I’d have to declare another tie.
In ’03-04, Hamann was at the wrong end of his career and in decline. In the two seasons following, he proved he was still capable of big performances on big occasions but Liverpool were never going to win the League with Hamann as a mainstay in central midfield going into the 2004-05 season, let alone beyond. Most supporters agree that Liverpool will not win the League with Lucas as a mainstay in central midfield either. The one thing Lucas has in his favour is his age. While being young doesn’t guarantee he will improve, comparing a 23-year old with a 31-year old experienced international is hardly fair. Honestly, I’d probably choose Hamann aged 31 than Lucas aged 23 but it is a tough, tough decision and one I could regret in three years time.
Gerrard is central-midfielder who would go onto play right-wing and later as a forward. Kuyt is a forward who would go onto play right-wing. In the summer of 2004 everyone could see that 24-year old Gerrard was our best and most influential player and was key to the club’s fortunes in the coming years. In 2009-10, supporters are divided over the merits of the industrious Kuyt and with him being aged 30, there are big questions over how long he should remain in the club’s first team. No contest, I choose Gerrard ’03-04.
Despite being many fans’ choice for Player of the Season in ’02-03 (not that we were spoilt for choice), Murphy deteriorated in ’03-04. Playing in central midfield with Gerrard as a partner, simply didn’t work as possession was too easily lost and the back four had too little protection. Despite an improvement in form during the run in (and another winner against the Mancs), ’03-04 was a disappointing year for Murphy. Mascherano started this season badly but since then has been one of our best outfield players (if not the best). Ultimately, this is a choice between the captain of Argentina and the captain of Fulham... Masch.
Kewell in ’03-04 actually had his best season for the club. Babel’s best season to date was ’07-08. Kewell started well but was poor in the second half of that season. Babel started poorly but improved in the second half of this season. Kewell never fulfilled his potential at Anfield and there is every chance Babel won’t either. I can’t separate these two.
Gerrard has been a massive disappointment in this campaign but has been outstanding for the previous decade. Heskey was a massive disappointment for most of his Liverpool career. Comparing Gerrard in 09-10 with Heskey in 03-04, I would still take Gerrard though it isn’t as clear-cut as it should be.
Torres is better than Owen in any season full stop. In fact, Torres is better than Owen and Heskey combined. Not just my opinion but backed up by the stats. In ’03-04 Owen and Heskey scored 23 goals in 65 League appearances between them; in ’09-10 Torres scored 18 in 22 appearances.
Henchoz in ’03-04 was on his last legs and Traore was crap so Skrtel and Kyrgiakos would get the nod.
Biscan was a terrible defender and something of a joke figure wherever he played so Aurelio is the better utility player (when fit).
Smicer 03-04 and Maxi 09-10 are both knocking on but Maxi is the better player and, on the evidence of this season, looks better suited to the Premiership. I’d have Maxi.
Baros missed much of the ’03-04 season due to injuries and simply not being selected after his recovery – a bit like Aquilani in ’09-10. Aquilani has better pedigree and a footballing brain whereas Baros was always something of a headless chicken. I’d choose Aquaman.
It’s hard to choose between Florent Sinama-Pongolle ’03-04 and David Ngog ’09-10. Both young, both raw, both possessing potential and both French. Sinama looked the more rounded player but his strike rate of 2 goals in 23 appearances in ’03-04 is bettered by Ngog’s 8 in 35 so far in ’09-10. Personally, I’d have Sinama but either way it’s a gamble on potential. Finally Le Tallec ’03-04 and Riera ’09-10. Both are pricks and neither are as good as they think. Take your pick or better still pick none.
So overall, the 2009-10 first XI still looks stronger (albeit not massively) than the 2003-04 team while the 2009-10 squad is stronger. There is no evidence that the team has gone backwards based on comparisons of playing staff.
How to conclude? Well my view is simple. I want Rafa to remain LFC Manager for another season at least. I would completely understand if he chose to move on but for the sake of the club, I hope he does not. Does that make me a hypocrite because I wanted Houllier out? I think I’ve proven that there were criticisms of Houllier’s performance that stand up to scrutiny so no.
Sunday, 11 April 2010
Identity crisis
Unusually, I’ve watched Barcelona twice this week. First in their comprehensive mauling of Arsenal in the Champions League quarter-final and then in their comfortable 2-0 win over Real Madrid at the Bernabeu yesterday. How I envy real Barca fans being able to watch what is surely currently the best team in the world featuring the current best player in the world in Lionell Messi week-in week-out instead of the shite we, Liverpool fans have had to put up with this season (and in many previous seasons).
It got me to thinking, why can’t a supporter change his team? What is it that binds us to a particular team or ‘franchise’ as is now the more accurate description.
Why am I a Liverpool fan, cursed to have been miserable for most of the last season?
The immediate answer is I became a Liverpool fan because my Dad was beyond him introducing me to the game I was seduced by the brilliance of Robbie Fowler and Steve McManaman at the start of the Evans era. Fowler in particular was the first footballer I truly adored and became truly fanatical over. At that time, Liverpool were unquestionably the most successfully British team of all time and despite a sabbatical under the inept leadership of Graeme Souness we believed we were heading back to the top. While ahead of us, the Mancs were within our sights and never too far out of reach to be hauled back.
Liverpool was a team with history surrounding with romance. Older fans would regale us with tales of legendary players from years gone by. We would learn of the times when with Stevie Heighway on the wing, we had dreams and songs to sing.
Nowadays the dreams have been replaced by fears. We fear we may never again get back on our perch and realistically we can see no signs of that happening any time soon. Our remaining dream is of the day the bastard Americans piss off and pray that the next regime will be far better for us (but fear they won’t be) – ultimately that hardly feels worth singing about.
The values that Bill Shankly instilled in the club that made my father so love the man and the club are gone. We watch pampered millionaires incapable of genuine empathy for the working class fan. If they don’t play, they want to move to a club that will play them. If they don’t challenge for the top prizes, they want to move to a club that will do. In their minds, it is the club’s responsibility to provide for them a team good enough to win honours with them in the side and not, as the fans see it, their responsibility to earn their places in the side by playing well enough to lead the club to honours.
Whereas Bill Shankly once made Liverpool truly the people’s club long before David Moyes uttered the phrase about the Blueshite, Liverpool is now run by two immoral Americans whose sole concern is obtaining as much of the people’s money as possible and giving nothing in return.
What’s worse, the game itself has evolved into something ugly and unpleasant. Whereas football was once a contest fought out between 22 men on a patch of grass and success was earned through graft, good football and good management, now success is dictated by money. Not money earned progressively through years of success on the field and good management off it but money loaned from banks or gifted by billionaire sugar daddies who treat football as little more than a toy.
Someone asked me recently about England’s chances of winning the World Cup and I told him I genuinely hope England don’t win the World Cup. Could you imagine Sir Rio Ferdinand and Sir Wayne Rooney? What about Ashley Cole OBE or John Terry OBE? Honoured for services to sport despite being deplorable twats both on and especially off the pitch. These are not moral men. These are not role models for anyone. They are men blessed with an extraordinary talent which they have ruthlessly exploited to earn more money than most people could ever dream of. The vast majority of the fans and fanatics whose dreams they carry earn less in a year than these guys pick up every couple of days.
This is the exact opposite of the socialism in which Bill Shankly believed.
What is a club? Is it a name? A badge? A Stadium? I would say that people stay with their teams out of a sense of duty not reciprocated by the players and staff within those teams. Players change, badges change, stadiums change, even the names of teams can change, but the fans hold the true identities of clubs.
This season I have felt at odds with a significant number of Liverpool fans. I guess ultimately I am saying I no longer recognise the identity of my own football club. Does the Liverbird stand for anything anymore? And if not, what is the point? Why fuel the greed of a couple of pricks when all it does is make you miserable?
It got me to thinking, why can’t a supporter change his team? What is it that binds us to a particular team or ‘franchise’ as is now the more accurate description.
Why am I a Liverpool fan, cursed to have been miserable for most of the last season?
The immediate answer is I became a Liverpool fan because my Dad was beyond him introducing me to the game I was seduced by the brilliance of Robbie Fowler and Steve McManaman at the start of the Evans era. Fowler in particular was the first footballer I truly adored and became truly fanatical over. At that time, Liverpool were unquestionably the most successfully British team of all time and despite a sabbatical under the inept leadership of Graeme Souness we believed we were heading back to the top. While ahead of us, the Mancs were within our sights and never too far out of reach to be hauled back.
Liverpool was a team with history surrounding with romance. Older fans would regale us with tales of legendary players from years gone by. We would learn of the times when with Stevie Heighway on the wing, we had dreams and songs to sing.
Nowadays the dreams have been replaced by fears. We fear we may never again get back on our perch and realistically we can see no signs of that happening any time soon. Our remaining dream is of the day the bastard Americans piss off and pray that the next regime will be far better for us (but fear they won’t be) – ultimately that hardly feels worth singing about.
The values that Bill Shankly instilled in the club that made my father so love the man and the club are gone. We watch pampered millionaires incapable of genuine empathy for the working class fan. If they don’t play, they want to move to a club that will play them. If they don’t challenge for the top prizes, they want to move to a club that will do. In their minds, it is the club’s responsibility to provide for them a team good enough to win honours with them in the side and not, as the fans see it, their responsibility to earn their places in the side by playing well enough to lead the club to honours.
Whereas Bill Shankly once made Liverpool truly the people’s club long before David Moyes uttered the phrase about the Blueshite, Liverpool is now run by two immoral Americans whose sole concern is obtaining as much of the people’s money as possible and giving nothing in return.
What’s worse, the game itself has evolved into something ugly and unpleasant. Whereas football was once a contest fought out between 22 men on a patch of grass and success was earned through graft, good football and good management, now success is dictated by money. Not money earned progressively through years of success on the field and good management off it but money loaned from banks or gifted by billionaire sugar daddies who treat football as little more than a toy.
Someone asked me recently about England’s chances of winning the World Cup and I told him I genuinely hope England don’t win the World Cup. Could you imagine Sir Rio Ferdinand and Sir Wayne Rooney? What about Ashley Cole OBE or John Terry OBE? Honoured for services to sport despite being deplorable twats both on and especially off the pitch. These are not moral men. These are not role models for anyone. They are men blessed with an extraordinary talent which they have ruthlessly exploited to earn more money than most people could ever dream of. The vast majority of the fans and fanatics whose dreams they carry earn less in a year than these guys pick up every couple of days.
This is the exact opposite of the socialism in which Bill Shankly believed.
What is a club? Is it a name? A badge? A Stadium? I would say that people stay with their teams out of a sense of duty not reciprocated by the players and staff within those teams. Players change, badges change, stadiums change, even the names of teams can change, but the fans hold the true identities of clubs.
This season I have felt at odds with a significant number of Liverpool fans. I guess ultimately I am saying I no longer recognise the identity of my own football club. Does the Liverbird stand for anything anymore? And if not, what is the point? Why fuel the greed of a couple of pricks when all it does is make you miserable?
Liverpool 0 Fulham 0: Race for fourth over
It’s all over. My predictions over how many points the likes of Spurs, City and Villa will drop between now and the end of the season may well be proven to be accurate but ultimately my hopes for Liverpool clinching fourth depended on us taking 16 points from our final 6 matches. We have taken just 2 from our first 2 of those and now cannot mathematically achieve 70 points.
Today’s result was harsh and an unfair reflection of the game. From the first whistle to the last, we dominated Fulham whose ambitions for this game extended no further than a clean sheet. We made scoring chances but Mark Schwarzer has been one of those keepers over the years who always plays a blinder against us and in truth, he was required to make no extraordinary saves and therein lies the problem.
The likes of Aquilani, Ngog and even Babel continually threatened to threaten without ever managing to do so. From Maxi Rodriguez and Glen Johnson we got industry but ultimately little real quality and in games such as this, a moment of genuine quality is required.
Of course, had referee Andre Mariner emerged from puberty with a set of balls, Jonathan Greening would have been correctly sent off in the 36th minute and Liverpool would have faced 9 men behind the ball instead of 10. We will never get to find out if, under those circumstances, Fulham would have tired and capitulated. As it was, it was a relatively simple task for them to shut out Liverpool for 90 minutes.
The substitutes Kuyt, Benayoun and Pacheco added nothing to Liverpool as an attacking force and it speaks volumes that our best efforts came from defensive midfielder Javier Mascherano, our centre-half turned left-back Daniel Agger, and our centre-half Sotirios Krygiakos.
Last season it was said that we were a two-man team: those men being Torres and Gerrard. Though I don’t agree with the statement, I agree that last season with those two men on the pitch, Liverpool were infinitely more likely to win matches and without one or both they often struggled to break down resilient defences. This season, the statement could easily be changed to ‘Liverpool is a one-man team’ such has been the deterioration in Steven Gerrard’s game.
With no Torres on the field today, Liverpool needed someone to deliver a performance of real attacking quality. Had Liverpool’s captain delivered a captain’s performance, perhaps we might have taken 3 points and still been in the race for fourth place. Instead, yet another game passed Gerrard by and his most noticeable contribution was to contort his face in yet another childish display of frustration as a teammate’s pass found an opponent instead of his skipper.
People frequently attempt to scaremonger saying Gerrard will leave if we don’t finish fourth. We won’t finish fourth and Gerrard is as culpable as anyone else for that. Unlike much of the dross and nearly-men Rafa has been forced to sign due to the financial constraints placed upon the club by the bastard Americans, Gerrard is a player with the ability to elevate his team to new heights. This campaign he has dragged them to lower depths more often than not.
Gerrard can fucking go. Torres is the one outfield player left at the club who can truly be described as one of the best players in the world and sadly that is the problem. Torres aside, we are a Europa League team and being a Europa League team is now something we will have to get used to.
Part of me thinks we should now go all out to win the Europa even if it means resting players for our remaining League fixtures. If we win the competition, we’ll be back in it next season irrespective of where we finish and if we don’t I just hope that wherever we finish jolts the owners into the belated realisation that the fault for this season’s regression lies not with the manager but with the lack of investment in the team at a time when three rival teams have been heavily invested in.
Today’s result was harsh and an unfair reflection of the game. From the first whistle to the last, we dominated Fulham whose ambitions for this game extended no further than a clean sheet. We made scoring chances but Mark Schwarzer has been one of those keepers over the years who always plays a blinder against us and in truth, he was required to make no extraordinary saves and therein lies the problem.
The likes of Aquilani, Ngog and even Babel continually threatened to threaten without ever managing to do so. From Maxi Rodriguez and Glen Johnson we got industry but ultimately little real quality and in games such as this, a moment of genuine quality is required.
Of course, had referee Andre Mariner emerged from puberty with a set of balls, Jonathan Greening would have been correctly sent off in the 36th minute and Liverpool would have faced 9 men behind the ball instead of 10. We will never get to find out if, under those circumstances, Fulham would have tired and capitulated. As it was, it was a relatively simple task for them to shut out Liverpool for 90 minutes.
The substitutes Kuyt, Benayoun and Pacheco added nothing to Liverpool as an attacking force and it speaks volumes that our best efforts came from defensive midfielder Javier Mascherano, our centre-half turned left-back Daniel Agger, and our centre-half Sotirios Krygiakos.
Last season it was said that we were a two-man team: those men being Torres and Gerrard. Though I don’t agree with the statement, I agree that last season with those two men on the pitch, Liverpool were infinitely more likely to win matches and without one or both they often struggled to break down resilient defences. This season, the statement could easily be changed to ‘Liverpool is a one-man team’ such has been the deterioration in Steven Gerrard’s game.
With no Torres on the field today, Liverpool needed someone to deliver a performance of real attacking quality. Had Liverpool’s captain delivered a captain’s performance, perhaps we might have taken 3 points and still been in the race for fourth place. Instead, yet another game passed Gerrard by and his most noticeable contribution was to contort his face in yet another childish display of frustration as a teammate’s pass found an opponent instead of his skipper.
People frequently attempt to scaremonger saying Gerrard will leave if we don’t finish fourth. We won’t finish fourth and Gerrard is as culpable as anyone else for that. Unlike much of the dross and nearly-men Rafa has been forced to sign due to the financial constraints placed upon the club by the bastard Americans, Gerrard is a player with the ability to elevate his team to new heights. This campaign he has dragged them to lower depths more often than not.
Gerrard can fucking go. Torres is the one outfield player left at the club who can truly be described as one of the best players in the world and sadly that is the problem. Torres aside, we are a Europa League team and being a Europa League team is now something we will have to get used to.
Part of me thinks we should now go all out to win the Europa even if it means resting players for our remaining League fixtures. If we win the competition, we’ll be back in it next season irrespective of where we finish and if we don’t I just hope that wherever we finish jolts the owners into the belated realisation that the fault for this season’s regression lies not with the manager but with the lack of investment in the team at a time when three rival teams have been heavily invested in.
Monday, 5 April 2010
Birmingham 1 Liverpool 1
I’m feeling increasingly detached from the majority of Liverpool supporters I come into contact with. I made the mistake of wearing my replica shirt to go to the pub to watch our match versus Birmingham yesterday which seemed to be interpreted as an open invitation for fellow Reds to come over and talk to me about the game. I’ve no problem with that but what I do object to is that most of these ‘fans’ assume they can make simplistic negative and ill-informed comments to me that I will agree with and are then astounded when I don’t agree that “Rafa’s got to go” and “Lucas is shit”, etc., etc.
“Why does he have to make so many changes?” one red-faced fat man demanded. I told him honestly that I don’t know the reasons why Rafa had changed the starting line-up that LOST in Benfica but looking at the changes, seeing Maxi Rodriguez restored was no surprise given he only dropped out of the team for the Benfica game due to being cup-tied; seeing Benayoun come in for Babel can hardly be said to have weakened the team on paper, and given that Krygiakos will surely be needed on Thursday in the home leg against Benfica, it makes sense that he is given his first start in two months. Of the players rested, I thought Babel would have been given the chance to make amends for his red card in Portugal – particularly as he can’t play on Thursday – but equally it was no surprise he was left out after his stupidity let his teammates down so much. Meanwhile one would think people would applaud the decision not to play both Mascherano and Lucas in central midfield but people seemed to fixate on the fact Mascherano was rested rather than Lucas. “Lucas is shit” one guy said to me. “Rafa just loves Lucas” said another. I interpreted it slightly differently. To me, Lucas and Gerrard in central midfield are a more attacking pair than Mascherano and Gerrard and certainly more than Lucas and Mascherano. I also expect Rafa to select Gerrard and Mascherano in midfield against Benfica on Thursday so I can understand resting a player who expends so much energy ahead of such a crucial match. Finally, Agger dropped out. I don’t know if the player had a slight niggle but given his recent injury record, I can completely appreciate caution over the number of games he plays in quick succession. As mentioned, I can see logic in bringing Kyrgiakos back in which meant either Carragher or Agger dropping out. Given that choice, most fans would have dropped Agger rather than our leader on the pitch.
The truth is, I am not privy to the information at Rafa Benitez’s disposal and so can only make educated guesses as to why certain selection decisions were taken but I can at least see some benefits in those decisions which suggests team selection isn’t the no-brainer some people seem to think it is.
Then there was the decision to take Torres off on 65 minutes. At the time, I was as stunned as everyone else by what, on the surface appeared to be a bizarre tactical decision. Conventional wisdom suggests that your chances of winning are optimised by having your best goal-scorer on the pitch so withdrawing him with the game at 1-1 appeared to be a sign that the manager was content not to win.
However, the truth is we only put Birmingham under the sort of sustained pressure we fans were hoping for after Torres’ withdrawal. We looked more likely to score once he had come off than when he was on the pitch. If that doesn’t validate the manager’s brave decision, nothing will. Torres’ replacement, David Ngog, had two absolutely golden chances to win the game. Had he scored one, Rafa would have deserved to be hailed as a genius (although in reality people would have said he “got lucky” and “got away with it”).
Of course, he didn’t take those chances which hands detractors a stick to beat Rafa with. It’s easy to say “Torres would have scored that” but Torres is capable of missing chances too. He missed a couple of really good chances at Old Trafford, a couple in Benfica including a one-on-one, a number of decent chances in the home game against Sunderland and a bucket load in our defeat at Wigan. It’s fair to say that Torres is more likely to score than Ngog but no one can say with any certainty that Torres would have scored. The point is, Torres was on the pitch for 65 minutes and never looked like scoring whereas Ngog had two excellent chances to score.
Isn’t the real issue the fact that Benitez is only able to replace Torres with a 21-year old rookie who cost just £1.5m rather than a player with some if not equal star quality? I watched Carlo Ancelotti replace Nicolas Anelka with Didier Drogba at Old Trafford on Saturday. Later that day, Roberto Mancini was able to select Adebayor, Tevez and Bellamy and leave Santa-Cruz on the bench for City’s game with Burnley. Even Spurs can choose from Defoe, Crouch, Pavlyuchenko and Gudjohnsson up front. We’ve got Torres and Ngog then nothing. That isn’t the manager’s choice. That is the situation enforced on him by owners who have made a net profit in the last three transfer windows at a time when rival clubs are investing heavily.
Steven Gerrard’s reaction to the subbing of Torres doesn’t help matters. When the man wearing the captain’s armband is captured on camera making facial gestures that appear to show complete disbelief and distrust in his manager’s decisions, it is hardly a call for supporters to rally behind that manager. What David Ngog would think if he saw his skipper’s face as he was being introduced to the game? It was hardly a vote of confidence in his fledgling ability.
This was a game we needed to win for our top four ambitions and failure to win it really does leave us drinking in the last-chance saloon but looking at the result in isolation, a draw at St Andrews is not a terrible result. Birmingham were unbeaten in the League at home since September and have held the likes of Chelsea, Man Ure, Arsenal, Everton and Spurs. They are also our bogey team whom we have never beaten in the League under Rafa Benitez and even under Houllier we only won on this ground once. In the circumstances, a draw is a decent result and if we ultimately fail to qualify for the Champions League, it won’t be this result that is blamed.
A mate of mine told me he thought we “need to qualify for the Champions League or we’re going to go under”. I told him that’s pure shite and asked him if he seriously believed Rafa would be given any more money to spend on players if we finished fourth than if we didn’t. Until the ownership of the club changes, Liverpool FC is only going to head in one direction and that is not the fault of the current manager.
Another mate of mine criticised Benitez for selecting his starting XI and substitutions with one eye on the Benfica game. He was saying he just wished Rafa would focus on winning the game at hand and only then turn his attentions to the next match. It sounds fine in theory but surely a manager’s job is to look at the bigger picture rather than each game in isolation and to deliver success or comparative success over the course of a season rather than focussing only on a single game. Does Ferguson never make changes with one eye on forthcoming fixtures? Of course he does.
We discussed the instance a couple of years ago when Rafa withdrew Gerrard and Torres at Reading with one eye on the must-win game in Marseille. We lost 3-1 at Reading but won 4-0 in Marseille to qualify for the Champions League knock-out stages. Many people were up in arms over what was interpreted as throwing in the towel against Reading but ultimately, the manager’s decision paid off. “Why couldn’t he have tried to win the Reading game and the Marseille game?” my mate demanded. Who knows what would have happened had he done that. What we do know is what happened and in hindsight I am content with the action the manager took that day, just as I will be content if we eliminate Benfica at home on Thursday.
Football is a game of opinions and I respect people’s rights to have theirs. What I object to is opinions based on nothing but the crap churned out by the media based on no understanding of what is really happening at Anfield. Who do these muppets who want Rafa sacked think will do a better job? “Bring in Mourinho” they say. As if Mourinho would come to Anfield. That man has made a success of managing clubs with significant transfer kitties. Why would have take a pay cut and try to operate on a shoe-string budget at Anfield? Part of me thinks the Americans should axe Rafa and appoint Tony Mowbray as manager. The club would continue to slide down the table but at least all the fans could agree that their manager was shit.
“Why does he have to make so many changes?” one red-faced fat man demanded. I told him honestly that I don’t know the reasons why Rafa had changed the starting line-up that LOST in Benfica but looking at the changes, seeing Maxi Rodriguez restored was no surprise given he only dropped out of the team for the Benfica game due to being cup-tied; seeing Benayoun come in for Babel can hardly be said to have weakened the team on paper, and given that Krygiakos will surely be needed on Thursday in the home leg against Benfica, it makes sense that he is given his first start in two months. Of the players rested, I thought Babel would have been given the chance to make amends for his red card in Portugal – particularly as he can’t play on Thursday – but equally it was no surprise he was left out after his stupidity let his teammates down so much. Meanwhile one would think people would applaud the decision not to play both Mascherano and Lucas in central midfield but people seemed to fixate on the fact Mascherano was rested rather than Lucas. “Lucas is shit” one guy said to me. “Rafa just loves Lucas” said another. I interpreted it slightly differently. To me, Lucas and Gerrard in central midfield are a more attacking pair than Mascherano and Gerrard and certainly more than Lucas and Mascherano. I also expect Rafa to select Gerrard and Mascherano in midfield against Benfica on Thursday so I can understand resting a player who expends so much energy ahead of such a crucial match. Finally, Agger dropped out. I don’t know if the player had a slight niggle but given his recent injury record, I can completely appreciate caution over the number of games he plays in quick succession. As mentioned, I can see logic in bringing Kyrgiakos back in which meant either Carragher or Agger dropping out. Given that choice, most fans would have dropped Agger rather than our leader on the pitch.
The truth is, I am not privy to the information at Rafa Benitez’s disposal and so can only make educated guesses as to why certain selection decisions were taken but I can at least see some benefits in those decisions which suggests team selection isn’t the no-brainer some people seem to think it is.
Then there was the decision to take Torres off on 65 minutes. At the time, I was as stunned as everyone else by what, on the surface appeared to be a bizarre tactical decision. Conventional wisdom suggests that your chances of winning are optimised by having your best goal-scorer on the pitch so withdrawing him with the game at 1-1 appeared to be a sign that the manager was content not to win.
However, the truth is we only put Birmingham under the sort of sustained pressure we fans were hoping for after Torres’ withdrawal. We looked more likely to score once he had come off than when he was on the pitch. If that doesn’t validate the manager’s brave decision, nothing will. Torres’ replacement, David Ngog, had two absolutely golden chances to win the game. Had he scored one, Rafa would have deserved to be hailed as a genius (although in reality people would have said he “got lucky” and “got away with it”).
Of course, he didn’t take those chances which hands detractors a stick to beat Rafa with. It’s easy to say “Torres would have scored that” but Torres is capable of missing chances too. He missed a couple of really good chances at Old Trafford, a couple in Benfica including a one-on-one, a number of decent chances in the home game against Sunderland and a bucket load in our defeat at Wigan. It’s fair to say that Torres is more likely to score than Ngog but no one can say with any certainty that Torres would have scored. The point is, Torres was on the pitch for 65 minutes and never looked like scoring whereas Ngog had two excellent chances to score.
Isn’t the real issue the fact that Benitez is only able to replace Torres with a 21-year old rookie who cost just £1.5m rather than a player with some if not equal star quality? I watched Carlo Ancelotti replace Nicolas Anelka with Didier Drogba at Old Trafford on Saturday. Later that day, Roberto Mancini was able to select Adebayor, Tevez and Bellamy and leave Santa-Cruz on the bench for City’s game with Burnley. Even Spurs can choose from Defoe, Crouch, Pavlyuchenko and Gudjohnsson up front. We’ve got Torres and Ngog then nothing. That isn’t the manager’s choice. That is the situation enforced on him by owners who have made a net profit in the last three transfer windows at a time when rival clubs are investing heavily.
Steven Gerrard’s reaction to the subbing of Torres doesn’t help matters. When the man wearing the captain’s armband is captured on camera making facial gestures that appear to show complete disbelief and distrust in his manager’s decisions, it is hardly a call for supporters to rally behind that manager. What David Ngog would think if he saw his skipper’s face as he was being introduced to the game? It was hardly a vote of confidence in his fledgling ability.
This was a game we needed to win for our top four ambitions and failure to win it really does leave us drinking in the last-chance saloon but looking at the result in isolation, a draw at St Andrews is not a terrible result. Birmingham were unbeaten in the League at home since September and have held the likes of Chelsea, Man Ure, Arsenal, Everton and Spurs. They are also our bogey team whom we have never beaten in the League under Rafa Benitez and even under Houllier we only won on this ground once. In the circumstances, a draw is a decent result and if we ultimately fail to qualify for the Champions League, it won’t be this result that is blamed.
A mate of mine told me he thought we “need to qualify for the Champions League or we’re going to go under”. I told him that’s pure shite and asked him if he seriously believed Rafa would be given any more money to spend on players if we finished fourth than if we didn’t. Until the ownership of the club changes, Liverpool FC is only going to head in one direction and that is not the fault of the current manager.
Another mate of mine criticised Benitez for selecting his starting XI and substitutions with one eye on the Benfica game. He was saying he just wished Rafa would focus on winning the game at hand and only then turn his attentions to the next match. It sounds fine in theory but surely a manager’s job is to look at the bigger picture rather than each game in isolation and to deliver success or comparative success over the course of a season rather than focussing only on a single game. Does Ferguson never make changes with one eye on forthcoming fixtures? Of course he does.
We discussed the instance a couple of years ago when Rafa withdrew Gerrard and Torres at Reading with one eye on the must-win game in Marseille. We lost 3-1 at Reading but won 4-0 in Marseille to qualify for the Champions League knock-out stages. Many people were up in arms over what was interpreted as throwing in the towel against Reading but ultimately, the manager’s decision paid off. “Why couldn’t he have tried to win the Reading game and the Marseille game?” my mate demanded. Who knows what would have happened had he done that. What we do know is what happened and in hindsight I am content with the action the manager took that day, just as I will be content if we eliminate Benfica at home on Thursday.
Football is a game of opinions and I respect people’s rights to have theirs. What I object to is opinions based on nothing but the crap churned out by the media based on no understanding of what is really happening at Anfield. Who do these muppets who want Rafa sacked think will do a better job? “Bring in Mourinho” they say. As if Mourinho would come to Anfield. That man has made a success of managing clubs with significant transfer kitties. Why would have take a pay cut and try to operate on a shoe-string budget at Anfield? Part of me thinks the Americans should axe Rafa and appoint Tony Mowbray as manager. The club would continue to slide down the table but at least all the fans could agree that their manager was shit.
Friday, 2 April 2010
Benfica 2 Liverpool 1: 13 men versus 10
After the season we have had, it has almost become second nature to highlight the contribution of the referee to every disappointing result we have had. To fans of other clubs or even to fellow Liverpool fans who have not watched all of our games in full, it sounds like a petty whine but even taking into account my red-tinted view, being as objective as I can, I firmly believe that the number borderline and downright wrong decisions that have gone against us this season, significantly outweigh the number that have gone for us.
To win a competition, you need more decisions to go for you than not. For example, take the last minute penalty awarded to Reading against us in the FA Cup. Had the referee not given that decision, we would have progressed to the next round; instead we went out.
Last night, Benfica became the latest beneficiaries of a refereeing performance than favoured our opponents more than us. To have a goal disallowed, a man sent off and two penalties given against you in a tricky European away tie sounds harsh but they were merely highlights of 90+ minutes in which the 6 officials completely buckled under the intimidation of the vociferous home crowd who seemed more interested in throwing smoke bombs and fireworks at the goal-line assistant than watching a game of football. As a result, the Swedish referee allowed Torres and co to be beaten to a pulp by a team that seems to have modelled its approach on that of Blackburn or Stoke.
Of the key decisions in the game my views were:
The disallowed goal should have stood. Excuse my lack of clarity on this but I watched the game in a noisy pub on a blurry screen so I often couldn’t tell players apart. I think it was Lucas who was given off-side but replays seemed to show that if he was, it was by a nose – his feet were certainly in line – and it was at best marginal. However, it was clear that he did not interfere with play as he never had any chance of reaching the free-kick which went directly to the keeper who punched the ball away to the edge of the area from where Torres lashed it home.
Babel can have no complaints for being sent off. He is stupid, arrogant and rash and as soon as he put his hands to Luisao’s face, he was running the risk of being red-carded. I believe the rules define violent conduct as using “excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball” and it would be ridiculous to suggest Babel’s petty groping of Luisao‘s face amounted to excessive force. Under the rules it is an offence to “strike or attempt to strike an opponent”. Again I can’t see how anyone can define Babel’s actions as striking an opponent. However, I think rightly ot wrongly most referee’s would take the view that making any contact with another player’s face amounts to a sending off. Where I thought the referee was in error was in his failure to deal with Luisao. In Babel’s defence, Luisao is massive and I know from personal experience, when someone like that comes at you in such an aggressive manner your nature instinct is to reach out your arm to keep them at bay and even to shove them back. It’s a natural protective response. I thought Luisao should have been at least booked for his antics and given the bad foul he had committed on Torres at the start of the incident which was also worthy of at least a yellow if not a straight red, he should have been off as well.
Regarding the first penalty, I would like to see it again but my thoughts were that it was correctly awarded but it was cynically won by Aimar. To me, Insua’s reaction to the ball cannoning back of the post was rash and panicked. In a split second, Aimar positioned his body in such a way that he could throw himself over Insua’s leg and give the referee a decision to make. I’d say it was a 50/50 in terms of whether most refs would give a penalty but without having seen decent replays of the incident I’d have to say it was the right decision and the spot-kick that followed was unsaveable.
Regarding the second penalty, I would have to say there is no way that was the correct decision. Clearly the ball strikes Carragher’s arm but that is the very point, the ball struck Carra’s arm, not the other way round. The rules state:
“A direct free kick is awarded if a player deliberately handles the ball’ and conversely a penalty if the offence occurs within the penalty area. Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with his hand or arm. FIFA guidance adds that the referee should take the following into consideration when deciding on deliberateness: (1) The deliberate movement of the hand towards the ball (2) The distance between the opponent and the ball (3) The position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement.”
There is no way anyone can say that Carragher deliberately handled the ball. It was booted at him, unexpectedly from less than a yard away when he was already off-balance and unable to adjust his body position. There was no way he could move his arm out the way of the ball once it was hit. The fact the arm was raised before the ball was struck is clearly not a factor according to FIFA’s guidance above.
It was a bad decision given by the goal-line assistant who was probably trying to justify his role by doing something other than act as a target for the home fans’ missiles. If that was correctly awarded then we should easily have had about ten penalties for the same offence this season.
Overall, I feel very hard done by. We deserved to at least emerge undefeated from this tie but too much went against us. I can only hope we have a referee at Anfield who favours the home side as much as this Swedish berk did. Meanwhile, Luisao will get some reception from our supporters after his antics.
I believe Insua and Babel will both miss the second leg. Assuming Aurelio is still injured, Rafa’s only real option is to switch Carra to left-back and bring Kyrgiakos in to partner Agger. Meanwhile, I expect Yossi will come in for Babel on the left.
A 2-1 defeat in the first leg of a European tie away from home is never a bad result. We have the away goal and can easily pull back a one-goal deficit at Anfield. Really, we want to blitz them as we did to Real last year and really put the bastards in their place. They weren’t good as a football side. They were just a bunch of thugs and cheats who got the rub of the green from a shit referee.
Bring on the second leg, but first let’s go to Birmingham and come back with three points.
To win a competition, you need more decisions to go for you than not. For example, take the last minute penalty awarded to Reading against us in the FA Cup. Had the referee not given that decision, we would have progressed to the next round; instead we went out.
Last night, Benfica became the latest beneficiaries of a refereeing performance than favoured our opponents more than us. To have a goal disallowed, a man sent off and two penalties given against you in a tricky European away tie sounds harsh but they were merely highlights of 90+ minutes in which the 6 officials completely buckled under the intimidation of the vociferous home crowd who seemed more interested in throwing smoke bombs and fireworks at the goal-line assistant than watching a game of football. As a result, the Swedish referee allowed Torres and co to be beaten to a pulp by a team that seems to have modelled its approach on that of Blackburn or Stoke.
Of the key decisions in the game my views were:
The disallowed goal should have stood. Excuse my lack of clarity on this but I watched the game in a noisy pub on a blurry screen so I often couldn’t tell players apart. I think it was Lucas who was given off-side but replays seemed to show that if he was, it was by a nose – his feet were certainly in line – and it was at best marginal. However, it was clear that he did not interfere with play as he never had any chance of reaching the free-kick which went directly to the keeper who punched the ball away to the edge of the area from where Torres lashed it home.
Babel can have no complaints for being sent off. He is stupid, arrogant and rash and as soon as he put his hands to Luisao’s face, he was running the risk of being red-carded. I believe the rules define violent conduct as using “excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball” and it would be ridiculous to suggest Babel’s petty groping of Luisao‘s face amounted to excessive force. Under the rules it is an offence to “strike or attempt to strike an opponent”. Again I can’t see how anyone can define Babel’s actions as striking an opponent. However, I think rightly ot wrongly most referee’s would take the view that making any contact with another player’s face amounts to a sending off. Where I thought the referee was in error was in his failure to deal with Luisao. In Babel’s defence, Luisao is massive and I know from personal experience, when someone like that comes at you in such an aggressive manner your nature instinct is to reach out your arm to keep them at bay and even to shove them back. It’s a natural protective response. I thought Luisao should have been at least booked for his antics and given the bad foul he had committed on Torres at the start of the incident which was also worthy of at least a yellow if not a straight red, he should have been off as well.
Regarding the first penalty, I would like to see it again but my thoughts were that it was correctly awarded but it was cynically won by Aimar. To me, Insua’s reaction to the ball cannoning back of the post was rash and panicked. In a split second, Aimar positioned his body in such a way that he could throw himself over Insua’s leg and give the referee a decision to make. I’d say it was a 50/50 in terms of whether most refs would give a penalty but without having seen decent replays of the incident I’d have to say it was the right decision and the spot-kick that followed was unsaveable.
Regarding the second penalty, I would have to say there is no way that was the correct decision. Clearly the ball strikes Carragher’s arm but that is the very point, the ball struck Carra’s arm, not the other way round. The rules state:
“A direct free kick is awarded if a player deliberately handles the ball’ and conversely a penalty if the offence occurs within the penalty area. Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with his hand or arm. FIFA guidance adds that the referee should take the following into consideration when deciding on deliberateness: (1) The deliberate movement of the hand towards the ball (2) The distance between the opponent and the ball (3) The position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement.”
There is no way anyone can say that Carragher deliberately handled the ball. It was booted at him, unexpectedly from less than a yard away when he was already off-balance and unable to adjust his body position. There was no way he could move his arm out the way of the ball once it was hit. The fact the arm was raised before the ball was struck is clearly not a factor according to FIFA’s guidance above.
It was a bad decision given by the goal-line assistant who was probably trying to justify his role by doing something other than act as a target for the home fans’ missiles. If that was correctly awarded then we should easily have had about ten penalties for the same offence this season.
Overall, I feel very hard done by. We deserved to at least emerge undefeated from this tie but too much went against us. I can only hope we have a referee at Anfield who favours the home side as much as this Swedish berk did. Meanwhile, Luisao will get some reception from our supporters after his antics.
I believe Insua and Babel will both miss the second leg. Assuming Aurelio is still injured, Rafa’s only real option is to switch Carra to left-back and bring Kyrgiakos in to partner Agger. Meanwhile, I expect Yossi will come in for Babel on the left.
A 2-1 defeat in the first leg of a European tie away from home is never a bad result. We have the away goal and can easily pull back a one-goal deficit at Anfield. Really, we want to blitz them as we did to Real last year and really put the bastards in their place. They weren’t good as a football side. They were just a bunch of thugs and cheats who got the rub of the green from a shit referee.
Bring on the second leg, but first let’s go to Birmingham and come back with three points.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
