Blade Posted January 26, 2013 Posted January 26, 2013 Well Sheffield United pretty much embarassed themselves. Standard. Thats why we are in League 1 I suppose.
Fierce_LiNk Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 Watched our game yesterday and thought we played good football, particularly in that first half. Should have been around 4 or 5-0 going into half-time. I love Anderson. Apart from his problem with injuries and fitness, he is class. He picks up the ball and drives forward like a battering ram. Has to be said that we created more thanks to the likes of him and Nani. Great performance. Chelsea salvaged a 2-2 draw against Brentford. Benitez for manager of the season.
Fierce_LiNk Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 Tottenham and Liverpool went full retard and lost their games today. If Spurs don't buy a striker now, I'd pay to see Dazzy's response to that.
Fierce_LiNk Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 I laughed so hard at the ITV report when they mentioned the Chelsea game. "A rare goal from Fernando Torres..." So smooth.
MoogleViper Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 Tottenham and Liverpool went full retard and lost their games today. If Spurs don't buy a striker now, I'd pay to see Dazzy's response to that. Why is it always Tottenham/Liverpool played badly rather than Leeds/Oldham played well?
Ellmeister Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 Because we know Leeds and Oldham played well but that still shouldn't be enough if the likes of Crapenham and Liverpoor play well. Luckily they didn't and got knocked out. We didn't play well but I'm confident we'll win the replay.
Jimbob Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 Hahahaha, i was laughing so hard during the Liverfool/Oldham game earlier. Just goes to show that anything is possible in the FA Cup.
Ramar Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 For once I'm glad to get a boring draw at home. Was dreading one of the Manchester teams or one of the giant slayers away. Shit small pitches are our nemesis.
MadDog Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 This time it was very much the case of Liverpool being fucking dreadful rather than the League 1 team being amazing. Fair enough, they played their gameplan well. But every single Liverpool player should be ashamed with their performance. It was absolutely diabolical. There's nothing else to say about any of them other than it was pathetic.
nekunando Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 This time it was very much the case of Liverpool being fucking dreadful rather than the League 1 team being amazing. Fair enough, they played their gameplan well. But every single Liverpool player should be ashamed with their performance. It was absolutely diabolical. There's nothing else to say about any of them other than it was pathetic. I only caught the last few minutes..
Fierce_LiNk Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 Why is it always Tottenham/Liverpool played badly rather than Leeds/Oldham played well? Because it's much more fun to slag off Liverpool and Spurs. Bit of a daft question, that.
MadDog Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 I only caught the last few minutes.. Lucky twat.
MoogleViper Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 Because it's much more fun to slag off Liverpool and Spurs. Bit of a daft question, that. But it's so prominent in the media. Whenever the top four lose, it's all about how they played badly, rather than how the other team played well. Take this quote from The Sun: "Leeds rode their luck and on 49 minutes it was McCormack who doubled the lead for the home side." Rode their luck? Was he watching the same match? Leeds were clearly the better side, yet the paper is all "Spurs did this, they didn't do that, they made these mistakes". Although not every article is like that. This Guardian article sums up the game pretty well.
Fierce_LiNk Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 But it's so prominent in the media. Whenever the top four lose, it's all about how they played badly, rather than how the other team played well. Take this quote from The Sun: "Leeds rode their luck and on 49 minutes it was McCormack who doubled the lead for the home side." Rode their luck? Was he watching the same match? Leeds were clearly the better side, yet the paper is all "Spurs did this, they didn't do that, they made these mistakes". Although not every article is like that. This Guardian article sums up the game pretty well. I wouldn't know, I don't read that drivel. I would advise others to do the same. You have to admit though that with the quality of players that are in the Spurs and Liverpool side that they should be beating teams from lower leagues. As well as teams such as Oldham and Leeds play on the day, there has to be an element of Spurs and Liverpool not playing all that well. It shouldn't really take anything from Oldham or Leeds, since they both played really well and you have to in order to beat teams like they did. Liverpool don't really have much of an excuse, but Spurs played with Dempsey up front, which is bizarre. Their own fault for not buying a striker, mind.
MadDog Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 Our starting 11 was very good, and our defence was capable of dealing with their aerial bombardment. Rodgers' interview after was spot on. Fans are so fickle though. Before the game: "great to see such a positive and strong lineup" After the game: "OMG ROGERZ PUT RONG TEAM OUT #ROGERSOUT" Whoppers.
MoogleViper Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 You have to admit though that with the quality of players that are in the Spurs and Liverpool side that they should be beating teams from lower leagues. As well as teams such as Oldham and Leeds play on the day, there has to be an element of Spurs and Liverpool not playing all that well. It shouldn't really take anything from Oldham or Leeds, since they both played really well and you have to in order to beat teams like they did. But the winning team is always the one that played better. Spurs/Liverpool don't have any sort of advantage because their players cost more money. They only cost more money because they play consistently well. Any player can put in a good performance, but when lower teams beat higher teams everybody thinks "well there must have been some sort of problem, that can't possibly be the case normally", rather than "x team/players played well, they were the better team on the day".
Fierce_LiNk Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 Our starting 11 was very good, and our defence was capable of dealing with their aerial bombardment. Rodgers' interview after was spot on. Fans are so fickle though. Before the game: "great to see such a positive and strong lineup" After the game: "OMG ROGERZ PUT RONG TEAM OUT #ROGERSOUT" Whoppers. It was a strong team, tbh. Looking at it, there was more than enough to win that game. Only question mark would be whether he should have played both Allen and Henderson.
MadDog Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 It was a strong team, tbh. Looking at it, there was more than enough to win that game. Only question mark would be whether he should have played both Allen and Henderson. Against a premiership team you could question the midfield selection, but against Oldham no chance. Allen is great defensively and Henderson has terrific work rate. They're both £15m players, they should be able to boss a side like Oldham.
Fierce_LiNk Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 But the winning team is always the one that played better. Spurs/Liverpool don't have any sort of advantage because their players cost more money. They only cost more money because they play consistently well. Any player can put in a good performance, but when lower teams beat higher teams everybody thinks "well there must have been some sort of problem, that can't possibly be the case normally", rather than "x team/players played well, they were the better team on the day". I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. There is much more to it than simply "they play consistently well", such as their natural quality, the training that they've had, the diet and facilities on offer, the fact that many of them are good enough to represent their country. For example, there's a lot more to Xavi's game than he simply "plays consistently well." It's a tiny bit naive to think that's all there is to it. Against a premiership team you could question the midfield selection, but against Oldham no chance. Allen is great defensively and Henderson has terrific work rate. They're both £15m players, they should be able to boss a side like Oldham. I'm not sure I'd have played them together against anyone. They're not very forward-thinking players, they're both a bit too defensively minded, especially with the roles they play. Granted, there was more than enough in the side to beat Oldham. But, Liverpool have showed that they have gaps and can be beaten. They're not the team they once were.
MadDog Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 I'm not sure I'd have played them together against anyone. They're not very forward-thinking players, they're both a bit too defensively minded, especially with the roles they play. Granted, there was more than enough in the side to beat Oldham. But, Liverpool have showed that they have gaps and can be beaten. They're not the team they once were. Henderson excels in a more advanced position, he just hardly gets a chance there and his confidence seems very up and down. Same could be said for Allen really in that he is limited sometimes because of where he is played. I feel like we've made progress this season, at times we've played really awesome football and on paper we have a very good starting 11. Add Coutinho to that, who should sign very soon, and we have some really good options.
MadDog Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 Not sure how to feel about the game. On the whole, we were outplayed for the whole of the 2nd half and did good first half. On that you could say a point is good. It feels like a loss, though. So gutted to be 2-0 up then for it to be 2-2 minutes later. We just couldn't slow the game down when we needed to, due to our passing being off. Carra was an absolute rock at the back and played really well. Wilshere was immense in the middle, he took control of the whole game in the 2nd half, i really admire him as a player. Oh, and nice dive Giroud.
Jon Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 Not sure how to feel about the game. On the whole, we were outplayed for the whole of the 2nd half and did good first half. On that you could say a point is good. It feels like a loss, though. So gutted to be 2-0 up then for it to be 2-2 minutes later. We just couldn't slow the game down when we needed to, due to our passing being off. Carra was an absolute rock at the back and played really well. Wilshere was immense in the middle, he took control of the whole game in the 2nd half, i really admire him as a player. Oh, and nice dive Giroud. I was sure it wasn't a dive when I saw it was Giroud, he really does seem a genuinely nice guy but I struggled to defend him upon seeing the replay So happy to see him playing so well, so many wrote him off when he first signed because he missed a couple of chances. Not only does the guy score but he creates so much around him and he's only going to get better. As for the game. I'm sick of hearing "we need to trust in our quality". I don't like to bad mouth Wenger but surely someone had some dirt on him that forced him to sign Santos. He's nothing like a usual Wenger signing, he barely looked fit enough to finish 30 mins, let alone the whole match.
MadDog Posted January 30, 2013 Posted January 30, 2013 I was sure it wasn't a dive when I saw it was Giroud, he really does seem a genuinely nice guy but I struggled to defend him upon seeing the replay So happy to see him playing so well, so many wrote him off when he first signed because he missed a couple of chances. Not only does the guy score but he creates so much around him and he's only going to get better. As for the game. I'm sick of hearing "we need to trust in our quality". I don't like to bad mouth Wenger but surely someone had some dirt on him that forced him to sign Santos. He's nothing like a usual Wenger signing, he barely looked fit enough to finish 30 mins, let alone the whole match. Thinking now, throwing Sterling on the right against Santos wouldn't have been a bad move. :p
Recommended Posts