Liverpool Message Board
you are viewing a single comment's thread.view the rest of the posts
Which is why today you want BR sacked, but yesterday you were telling us he's had a tough job and should be given till next season?
The stats are clear, 19 shots on the West Brom goal. You watched the game you tell me how many you think were weak shots (therefore blame the players inability, which is I know code for you to "sack BR”), and how many were goal bound if not for an outstanding save from Foster (which I'm confused which day of the week it is, but might also be code for – “Sack BR”?).
I'm sorry sofa, I'd like to have a discussion with you, as I'm interested in all views on how we can progress, but since no matter sooner or later it ends with "Sack BR" I'm not sure it’s an interesting discussion. It’s like reading the last line of a novel before reading chapter one.
DSteer I've said many times I evaluate Rodgers on a match by match basis.. If he's got the team playing then and we do well then yes he deserves another chance. However if we do very poor then no he doesn't deserve to be here..
A friend of mine in the pub tonight made a interesting observation
Whenever we play a good team we raise our game to match them.. ie Man City.. however when we play a team like West Brom we lower ourselves to their standards.. thats been our problem for a very long time..
Rather than play at the top of our game no matter who we play against..
- 3 Replies to LFC_Armchair_Supporter
Does that really make any sense?
Okay so it’s a game by game evaluation, so after the home defeat by Villa he deserved the axe, but the good form (with the exception of last night of course) since would ensure he is retained. But surely if you've already sacked him you'd never get the good form which was the reaction to the defeat. So it would be a shame if FSG actually followed your current advise in in fact BR could engineer a similar reaction in our next run of games.
On the raise the game observation, I think you mate might have this one upside down also. Seems to me the endless press criticism is that we've not won against a team ahead of us in the table, which in itself seems a bit strange as most clubs don't do as well against teams who are consistently better than them and therefore ahead in the table.
But I'd ask your mate how he explains the Norwich result, or results against the likes of Fulham or Sunderland. Maybe ask him if he's just reading old newspapers but not watching current matches?
You are quite right. The mental strength of the team has been weak for a long time. As Rodgers has been there for 6 months that is not his fault, surely even you can see that? You should also see that he has one helluva job to change that, and it's not done overnight
For the record, you don't evaluate him on a game by game basis - you were only prepared to give him 5 games!
I think it was simply down to not having Sturridge on the field. No bite or focal point up front.
Can any of the Stato's on here post up how many goals per game we've scored with Sturridge and goals per game without?
It might be a bit of a twisted statistic but it may prompt some further discussion.
To answer Armchairs question then yes he's right but I think it's down ot he fact that last night we didn't have Sturridge on the pitch. That out and out striker gives the defence someting o think about. When he plays centrally at least one defender goes with him. That creates space for others. Playing Shelvey etc. in that position, doesn't seem to work for us. They don't have that ability to really occupy defenders. The upshot is that shots on goal come from greater distances and players get less time to shoot.
Wasn't too long ago that Gerrard blasted in one of his trademark 25 yarders.
basically without Sturridge the teams balance is off and parking the bus, being aggressive and having pace up front is findng us out.