The let's not fire our manager thread

[jambreck]

In fact if we didn't get three penalties and only one was absolutely bang on, we may be six points lower than we are now.

Enough of this "if we didn't get three penalties" line of argument! It's no more useful now than it was when it was first brought up a few weeks ago. I'm quite certain that you wouldn't allow anyone to get away with saying, "if Krul hadn't saved all those shots" or "if Defoe had scored that one-on-one just after half time v West Ham". So why should your hypothetical scenarios be any more relevant?

As to only one of those penalties being "bang on", I'll grant you the one v Hull. But against Swansea, the dodgy penalty we did get only made up for the bang on penalty we didn't get. Not to mention the 5 or 6 bang on penalties we were denied last season, just the one of which could have been the difference between 5th and 4th (and, yes, I am aware that that is a hypothetical scenario!). So I think AVB was due a bit of luck in that regard.

 

[Lighty64]

In fact if we didn't get three penalties and only one was absolutely bang on, we may be six points lower than we are now.

in fact we did have 1 other nailed on, but ref gave it as a free kick outside the area when I was dead in line and it was in the area v Swansea.

we also had many occasions last season where we never got a pen, when we should of. i'm sure over the season 1 of those cost us CL

Also as those pens were not the last kick of the game, no one knows how the rest of the game would of turned out. a bit like commentators saying that a team should of had xxx amount of goals and been out of sight by now. once something happens in a game the rest of the game, won't be the same if that something happened had a different result.

we are playing a totally different system, with a totally different in the main squad. the last 4 seasons we have witnessed open and attacking football in the majority of matches, they have now become duller mainly cause we are no longer an easy team to play and score against. I bet with the set up now that if we were to be 2 or 3 goals up against Man U in the league at home we won't lose 5-3 (God that hurt)

 

[hodsgod]

Enough of this "if we didn't get three penalties" line of argument! It's no more useful now than it was when it was first brought up a few weeks ago. I'm quite certain that you wouldn't allow anyone to get away with saying, "if Krul hadn't saved all those shots" or "if Defoe had scored that one-on-one just after half time v West Ham". So why should your hypothetical scenarios be any more relevant?

As to only one of those penalties being "bang on", I'll grant you the one v Hull. But against Swansea, the dodgy penalty we did get only made up for the bang on penalty we didn't get. Not to mention the 5 or 6 bang on penalties we were denied last season, just the one of which could have been the difference between 5th and 4th (and, yes, I am aware that that is a hypothetical scenario!). So I think AVB was due a bit of luck in that regard.

You agree with me then, you think AVB is due some luck, and I was inferring we are lucky to have the points we have.

 

[jambreck]

You agree with me then, you think AVB is due some luck, and I was inferring we are lucky to have the points we have.

I agree that AVB got lucky with the Hull penalty.

That is all.

 

[Adam456]

I don't disagree with our tactics, on the whole - make ourselves very difficult to score against and keep the ball in their half, high line, pressing etc. etc. . My problem is with team selection going forward and retarded subs. As I said in the sack thread, we should be top of the league and this is a real waste of a title challenge

If he selects Sigurddson on Sunday and doesn't use Lamela if we are needing to score then I'm afraid that I will be in the sack camp

 

[jezz]

I don't disagree with our tactics, on the whole - make ourselves very difficult to score against and keep the ball in their half, high line, pressing etc. etc. . My problem is with team selection going forward and retarded subs. As I said in the sack thread, we should be top of the league and this is a real waste of a title challenge

If he selects Sigurddson on Sunday and doesn't use Lamela if we are needing to score then I'm afraid that I will be in the sack camp

I think the other negative aspect of AVBs slow integration thing, is others transfer targets might fcuk that, i wont get a game for months.

 

[jambreck]

I think the other negative aspect of AVBs slow integration thing, is others transfer targets might fcuk that, i wont get a game for months.

Possibly true.

But older fans will remember that, back when Liverpool were good - the best in Europe, in fact - they would routinely have their new players learn the Liverpool way in training and in the reserves for a few months before being unleashed on the first team. And they were mostly British players who needed little or no acclimatisation to English football.

I don't want to overplay the comparison but it has always surprised me how few clubs ever copied that philosophy - including Liverpool themselves over the past 20+ years.

 

[JUSTINSIGNAL]

I don't disagree with our tactics, on the whole - make ourselves very difficult to score against and keep the ball in their half, high line, pressing etc. etc. . My problem is with team selection going forward and retarded subs. As I said in the sack thread, we should be top of the league and this is a real waste of a title challenge

If he selects Sigurddson on Sunday and doesn't use Lamela if we are needing to score then I'm afraid that I will be in the sack camp

WOW

Did you really just write this?

 

[Blake Griffin]

WOW

Did you really just write this?

we have no divine right to claim that but two favourable results at home to west ham/newcastle and we would be.

 

[ohtottenham!]

Possibly true.

But older fans will remember that, back when Liverpool were good - the best in Europe, in fact - they would routinely have their new players learn the Liverpool way in training and in the reserves for a few months before being unleashed on the first team. And they were mostly British players who needed little or no acclimatisation to English football.

I don't want to overplay the comparison but it has always surprised me how few clubs ever copied that philosophy - including Liverpool themselves over the past 20+ years.

That’s true. LFC used to do that, often for more than just a few months, especially with their young players, and at a time when squads were much smaller. But those smaller squads also meant that a player was pretty confident of getting a good run out at some future point.

Also, in those days, their older players, who were the best in the league, would hang around with the club for years helping to blood in the young talent and ease the transition. Liverpool were basically top of the tree in those days and players, by and large, stayed put. There was nothing like the situation there is now with the rampant domestic and international transfer market. The latter hardly existed in those days.

Now, we have a much more rapid turnover of players in the game everywhere. These days, agents put so much pressure on clubs and players to maximize the value of their clients. Players, coaches, directors and owners just don’t hang around like they used to. Now, unfortunately in many ways, there’s much more pressure to succeed and succeed quickly.

 

[alfiespurs]

seriously though, can we stick with a manager for 5yrs, just to see what it's like?!

No This is SPURS and we like revolving doors -

 

[sebcole]

BIG BUMP needed at this oppositional time.