| BMJ wrote: |
| Ben91 wrote: |
| BMJ wrote: |
Chelsea: Disciplined, Determined, Smart, Better.
Liverpool: Dull, Tired, Bereft of Ideas, No Heart, Crap. |
What are you talking about? Until the Crouch sending off (which sent me into fits of laughter by the way, it was that bad) the game was relatively equal. In fact, Sissoko, Alonso and Leiva managed to win the midfield battle against Chelsea's first team central 3 of Mikel, Essien and Lampard. The fact you resort to words like "smart" to define them sums your credability up to be frank. It's so generic and lazy.
It's disappointing to have lost, though mainly because of the way it happened - to a fluke of a Lampard shot. It seems it is the only way he scores. |
Generic and lazy is Liverpool... I admit my answers are short and maybe i don't put as much effort and thought into my responses like some of others who post here, but i don't pretend to be a football commentator and i certainly do not strive to be some pseudo-elitist know it all, or a writer. I write my opinion about what how i see it. Couldn't give the skin of my nose about my credibility, reputation or whatever else when i just come in to give my two cents about your cruddy team.
And ye, Chelsea were smart... They didn't dive in with 2 footed challenges did they?
Maybe I should add "stupid" to sum up Liverpool's performance. Stupid Crouch and stupid Babel taking a free kick in front of goal that went out for a throw in. Stupid Benitez for whining for years he couldn't buy players and then not even playing em (eg Torres) when he gets em. Poor Management, Poor Performance, deal with it. |
Firstly, Peter Crouch isn't representative of the whole
Liverpool side. They can't be blamed for a totally rash and impulsive decision.
If you're going to just come on to say our performance is "stupid", then don't come on here at all. I think many will agree that it isn't constructive or with reasoning nor adds anything to the debate. It's just insulting - and nothing to do with the game. To say a player is "stupid" for slicing a free-kick wide is absurd. As is calling Benitez stupid for not playing Torres, after all it is a Carling Cup match. Did United get all this hassle when their squad facing Coventry was Kuszczak, Evans, Bardsley, Pique, O'Shea, Simpson, Martin, Nani, Eagles, Fangzhou, Anderson, Heaton, Brown, Eckersley, Carrick, Campbell? Granted it's only Conventry, and this is
Chelsea, but that is a weak squad that's asking to be eliminated. But since it's Benitez, who's the media has had everyone blinded towards him - and of course is the only player to ever leave out a new signed star player (who by the way, has only actually missed about 2 games when fit) - suddenly it's a major issue. Why don't you deal with the fact that (and i cringe at the usage of 'deal with it', but am making an exception just this once) sometimes, just
sometimes people have to form their own opinion that isn't fed to them? Try thinking for yourself.
| Forev wrote: |
| Ben91 wrote: |
I'm going to assume you watched the match. If you did, you'd know that for a large amount of time it was very equal and only after the goal and red card did we really fold. Which is indeed a problem of our side, i'm well aware. But up until that point we were just as likely as Chelsea to take the lead, and but for a flukey Chelsea goal who knows how it could have gone?
I rather think the fact we weren't capable of getting back into it was more of a factor rather than not showing any ambition to win. We were with only Voronin as a striker and a man down, with a fairly solid Chelsea side. We were left looking to him, El Zhar, Benayoun and Leiva to conjure something up, which was always going to be doubtful. I do wish Benitez had perhaps left Babel on and took a defender off, with nothing really left to lose. |
I did watch the match and I didn't think it was that equal. Maybe it appeared equal to some because the ball was going to and fro so the possession didn't really differentiate but I thought that Chelsea always looked to have more class and composure. Their passing was better, their play was more intelligent and they had more fluidity throughout not only on the ball but off of it.
Other than the Lucas chance and Carvalho's mistake I didn't see Liverpool really threaten, balls were continuously pumped up to Crouch whose threat has been nullified now that they don't allow him to climb over players and Sissoko was overplaying the ball and getting in the way of his own players. Your best players were Carragher and Itandje which shows how the game went...
I thought your players were having to work harder than Chelsea's even before Crouch got sent off and from then on your players fitness levels looked to drop and drop despite a good few of them not even playing a full game at the weekend.
I dunno, maybe it's just me but I'd like to hear other opinions? |
I do think it was relatively equal, especially for the first half. Crouch ran through near the very start and should've easily tested Cech, but his cross-cum-shot sailed harmlessly wide - i was disappointed at this because, even though he doesn't look to have the frame to power a shot from some way out, he does often make the 'keeper work from range. He should have done better. Babel ran through on the left and should've struck across the face of the goal with his (powerful) left foot. Had he resisted the urge to turn onto his favoured right i'm sure he would've forced something.. it was a great chance, one that even looked better than Leiva's later opportunity. We also had a few shots wide, which weren't clear cut - but then a lot of
Chelsea's weren't either. As chances go, it was pretty even. They did look overall sharper on the ball though, i admit. But i don't reckon they strained us to much in comparison to their defence - you may have a case that they edged it, but it was still quite finely balanced.
In the second half it was more one-sided, and we had no chance after Crouch was sent off.
Oh, and only five
Chelsea players played at the weekend, with six of our starters featuring, so i don't think we had any particular reason to be in better shape than they were. Although, we evidently were a lot less sharper.
| Kim Kallstrom wrote: |
Ben I don't understand how you could say it was ever equal.
The only Liverpool player to come out with any credit was Lucas.Everyone else had a shocker.When Liverpool needed a goal who did Rafa bring on?El Zhar the goalscoring machine of course!Rafa didn't seem to care about this game.Funny when you consider they're out of the league and it is evident that when they play a leading Champions League team they will go out.
Talk all you want about how Lampard's goal was deflected but Chelsea easily deserved it.Not because they played well.They were terrible.Just that Liverpool were that bad.Crouch was an idiot.Shocking challenge.Pure stupid.
Watch out for Lucas to get more games though.That guy will be a leading Prem star. |
Itandje was excellent up until the Shevchenko goal, so i don't think it was merely Leiva who did - but i get your point. Neither team were spectacular, although i don't know why you were expecting them to be.. surely you all know this is the Carling Cup? I want to win, or wanted to win it, as did everyone who takes part does - but it's considerably harder to play at the same tempo as you would in the Champions or Premier League.
El Zhar scored a terrific goal in the prior round against Cardiff, from 30 yards, so i don't see why he couldn't have pulled something out. He's a very skilful player and unfortunately for him mis-kicked the chance he got (which anyone could've done). Although granted, our bench was weak. We had Riise, Benayoun and him who could be brought on to impact on the game.. at least one of Kuyt or Torres should've travelled i feel. Or even a young striker like Lindfield or Nemeth (albeit throwing the Hungarian in would be a bit rash).
Why is it though that when fans are the ones labelling the tournament as a "Mickey Mouse Cup", it is a surprise when the managers don't take it as seriously as other competitions? And what's more, borderline anger (from some
Liverpool fans). He perhaps didn't take it totally seriously, but neither did Ferguson - and for all he knew he could have been 'out' of the Premier League running and in the UEFA Cup by now, he doesn't have a crystal ball. But does he get criticised?
Now, quite off-topic, but i'm not sure why "it is evident that when they play a leading
Champions League team they will go out." I don't know what you're judging this on. The Carling Cup? The League? Because in the past domestically we haven't been world-beaters, but in Europe we've been a match for anyone. Maybe it's because we struggled in the group? But that would be slightly naive, considering the struggling results were down to sheer lack of form (as all teams experience) which was rectified just in time. Surely the +15 goal difference in the last 3 games would suffice as reason to think we could take on anyone. Perhaps i'm mistaken. Then again, perhaps you are. Who's to know?
| MontyMagpie wrote: |
| Ben91 wrote: |
That's why i like the Carling Cup though.. player's just feel free to play without much restraint. Roll on the second half. There's sure to be goals before long. |
2 goals to Chelsea.  |
And?
| MontyMagpie wrote: |
| Now Liverpool are not even a cup team. |
Check your definition of "cup team". To me, it's a side who're good in the cups and through which significantly better than their league campaigns - which we seem to be. I suppose we were supposed to win every cup going though, silly me.
