Champions League 25/26

[Letters]

Rashford definitely has some ability, although I raised an eyebrow at Barca wanting him. Literally a week or two ago there were stories about them already looking at terminating his contract.
Now 1 good game later he's being proclaimed as the new Messi (slight exaggeration there, but people do massively overreact to individual games and performances).

[Marc Overmars]

His application at United was questionable but a lot of that was also down to the state of the club and it being an environment where almost every player with ability has suffered over the past decade.

I’ve always felt Rashford was a decent player and clearly on his day he can be electric. I remember there was some paper talk of us potentially being interested a year or two ago and I would not have complained had it happened.

[Letters]

I’ve always felt Rashford was a decent player and clearly on his day he can be electric. I remember there was some paper talk of us potentially being interested a year or two ago and I would not have complained had it happened.

I felt he was worth a punt in January but it wasn't a popular opinion on here

[IBK]

See where I disagree is that it’s not tenable for a team to be consistently having to chase a win in the last knockings of a game. And that’s been the story for Liverpool every game this season, now with the exception of Burnley they’ve been able to do that because as you say their attacking ability or with us a one off bit of magic. But the reason they are having to do it is because they are vulnerable at the back, the main difference between Arsenal and Liverpool is that if we had managed to come out of the blocks and get a 2-0 lead early that would be the game done (in the last three years there has been three occasions where we’ve blown a 2 goal lead and each time it’s because our defence was significantly compromised by injury)

I think it’s actually arguable that Bournemouth and Atletico could have shown more courage and pushed for a winner but they were punished because (a bit like us) they tried to settle for a draw.

I think that both things can be, and are true.

Liverpool's late results are undoubtedly down to fitness; stamina; attacking nous and self-belief, and I think that to put this down to just luck does Slot a disservice (not that you have done so).

But you are correct to look at why they have had to do this. There are consequences of focussing on an all out attcking style that in some ways is the antithesis of Areteta's focus on control (albeit that we saw a more conservative, and unremarked, different approach from Liverpool when we played them at Anfield a couple of weeks ago). One of these is vulnerability at the back to teams willing to take risks themselves in what is often the wide open play that Liverpool tends to thrive in. And that - together with Slot's focus on signing attacking players - is what can leave them vulnerable at the back.

It takes a lot of bravery to go toe to toe with a team with an attack of the speed and quality of Liverpool's, and Slot undoubtedly relies on this to discourage opponents putting his defence under damaging pressure. We have to hope that other managers will see this, and look to try to exploit what seems like an imbalance/weakness by going forwards rather than playing the game Slot wants them to play. The frustrating thing about our result is that we are one of the few teams with the struture and players who can both remain defensively solid and do this.

[Mac76]

I felt he was worth a punt in January but it wasn't a popular opinion on here

I wasn't against it, but I think we'd stymied ourselves by having two PL loans (Neto and Sterling) already and that's the most a team is allowed to have

[IBK]

That's a curious way of looking at it mate. All teams want points. They are not going to be motivated by doing us a favour. And there are plenty of decent teams in the league with astute managers who should be able to spot the weak spot in Liverpool's game. If you are suggesting that all teams in the league will 'roll over' and play into Liverpool's hands by trying to defend for 90 minutes I think that's a long shot.

[HCZ_Reborn]

I think that both things can be, and are true.

Liverpool's late results are undoubtedly down to fitness; stamina; attacking nous and self-belief, and I think that to put this down to just luck does Slot a disservice (not that you have done so).

But you are correct to look at why they have had to do this. There are consequences of focussing on an all out attcking style that in some ways is the antithesis of Areteta's focus on control (albeit that we saw a more conservative, and unremarked, different approach from Liverpool when we played them at Anfield a couple of weeks ago). One of these is vulnerability at the back to teams willing to take risks themselves in what is often the wide open play that Liverpool tends to thrive in. And that - together with Slot's focus on signing attacking players - is what can leave them vulnerable at the back.

It takes a lot of bravery to go toe to toe with a team with an attack of the speed and quality of Liverpool's, and Slot undoubtedly relies on this to discourage opponents putting his defence under damaging pressure. We have to hope that other managers will see this, and look to try to exploit what seems like an imbalance/weakness by going forwards rather than playing the game Slot wants them to play. The frustrating thing about our result is that we are one of the few teams with the struture and players who can both remain defensively solid and do this.

See where I disagree is that this is a consequence of playing style, it’s a consequence of players. Van Dijk is slow now, Konate has one good game and one shit game and they single mindedly prioritised attack over defence. So it’s more of a consequence of transfer policy.

Physically fit going forward means fuck all if they cannot reliably score enough goals to bridge clear deficiencies elsewhere on the pitch.

Bournemouth and Atletico may well have lost if they had tried to go for the win. They definitely lost as a result of holding on to what they had

[Mac76]

That's a curious way of looking at it mate. All teams want points. They are not going to be motivated by doing us a favour. And there are plenty of decent teams in the league with astute managers who should be able to spot the weak spot in Liverpool's game. If you are suggesting that all teams in the league will 'roll over' and play into Liverpool's hands by trying to defend for 90 minutes I think that's a long shot.

Not at all, up to a couple of seasons ago, people were saying with some justification that every team that faced Citeh basically did so believing they'd probably lose and either half-heartedly tried to play a bit at the beginning then shut up shop when conceding the first goal, or simply parked the bus to begin with - whereas every team tried to beat us - it gave Citeh an advantage

We need that same aura and it doesn't come from playing 3 DMs at Anfield

[McNamara That Ghost...]

My feeling is that by winning so many late early only adds to build up of emotional energy spent very early on in the season.

It's alright for now and perhaps it carries them through until they start playing well.

But I'd stop myself short of thinking it's neccesarily a good thing - not game after game.

[Mac76]

Lots of people on here said last season that Liverpool couldn't possibly sustain the pace whereas I said they could and well might, take a look at last season's table to see who was rigbt