Knee jerk central

[Elvoz]

All six wins 1-0's too the Jammy cunts.

We are not playing terribly and continue to be very hard to beat and with Torres not only back but showing good signs of his form returning soon we should remain positive. Personally I think our form is no different than at any other stage of the season (bar Stoke) but we are just not getting the rub of the green that we got earlier.

We shouldn't be giving up on the title that's for sure, especially when you consider the less than flattering form of our rivals, including Manchester

Now pick yourself up Craig me ol mucker, we have a big cup game this week

its how you win leagues fella
we did it for years

[Craig_H]

All six wins 1-0's too the Jammy cunts.

We are not playing terribly and continue to be very hard to beat and with Torres not only back but showing good signs of his form returning soon we should remain positive. Personally I think our form is no different than at any other stage of the season (bar Stoke) but we are just not getting the rub of the green that we got earlier.

We shouldn't be giving up on the title that's for sure, especially when you consider the less than flattering form of our rivals, including Manchester

Now pick yourself up Craig me ol mucker, we have a big cup game this week

If it was one or two 1-0 wins, you could say they're jammy. But it's 6. That's less to do with luck and more to do with the fact that they throw every attacker onto the pitch if they're chasing a winner. We do not.

I think we're playing very poorly. We create little and we are hard to beat for teams who arent actually trying to beat us. Most lower level sides we play against have no intention of coming out and playing open football in order to beat us. They're happy with the 0-0.

A top side would probably manage to beat us, the way we're currently playing.

United's form might be flattering, but they're winning and winning and winning. Wish we were.

[red g]

If it was one or two 1-0 wins, you could say they're jammy. But it's 6. That's less to do with luck and more to do with the fact that they throw every attacker onto the pitch if they're chasing a winner. We do not.

I think we're playing very poorly. We create little and we are hard to beat for teams who arent actually trying to beat us. Most lower level sides we play against have no intention of coming out and playing open football in order to beat us. They're happy with the 0-0.

A top side would probably manage to beat us, the way we're currently playing.

United's form might be flattering, but they're winning and winning and winning. Wish we were.

United have the fear factor as well, something that has been built up for years now, dont think you can underestimate that....also if you have berbatov, Giggs, scholes, nani, etc on the bench thats a world of difference to ngog, el zhar, benayoun, babel

[Craig_H]

United have the fear factor as well, something that has been built up for years now, dont think you can underestimate that....also if you have berbatov, Giggs, scholes, nani, etc on the bench thats a world of difference to ngog, el zhar, benayoun, babel

To be fair mate, we could have Messi and Eto'o on the bench, and i still wouldnt be totally convinced that rafa would bring them on.

[Reece]

To be fair mate, we could have Messi and Eto'o on the bench, and i still wouldnt be totally convinced that rafa would bring them on.

Now you're just being silly

[Craig_H]

Now you're just being silly

I'm not sure i am reggie.

Rafa doesnt overhaul the numbers with which we attack, regardless.

He swaps like for like, striker for striker. Or a defensive midfielder for a striker. But he rarely takes off a more defensive player, and replaces him with a forward or a striker.

[Reece]

And you don't think having the quality of Messi and Eto'o on the bench would maybe change his position on that?

Anyway it's a pointless discussion because if we had either of those two players then I'd like to think they may have a chance of being in the starting XI

[Craig_H]

And you don't think having the quality of Messi and Eto'o on the bench would maybe change his position on that?

Anyway it's a pointless discussion because if we had either of those two players then I'd like to think they may have a chance of being in the starting XI

I think he's SO regimented in his system that he'd be hard pressed to bring players on who he might feel would upset the defensive balance and solidity of the team. Which is fine, in most cases. Just not when you're in desperate need of a winner, or a goal to kill the game off.

If Messi and Eto'o were in the first XI, Gerrard and Torres would probably be on the bench

[Skillz]

If it was one or two 1-0 wins, you could say they're jammy. But it's 6. That's less to do with luck and more to do with the fact that they throw every attacker onto the pitch if they're chasing a winner. We do not.

I think we're playing very poorly. We create little and we are hard to beat for teams who arent actually trying to beat us. Most lower level sides we play against have no intention of coming out and playing open football in order to beat us. They're happy with the 0-0.

A top side would probably manage to beat us, the way we're currently playing.

United's form might be flattering, but they're winning and winning and winning. Wish we were.

Well Craig if you don't have the stomach for it can I suggest you don't flood every thread for the rest of season with your negative, defeatist ****e.

Thanks in advance

[Craig_H]

Well Craig if you don't have the stomach for it can I suggest you don't flood every thread for the rest of season with your negative, defeatist ****e.

Thanks in advance

Some of us find the 'everythings ok' patronising stuff that some flood threads with to be '****e' as well. Where in the rules does it say positive ****e is ok but negative isnt?

What's it got to do with stomach? Forums are here to discuss LFC related topics. Nowhere does it say there's only room for positive views. If repeating the same thing isnt allowed, then that same rule must apply for the overly positive stuff that some of us find patronising.

Thanks.

[ntto]

Some of us find the 'everythings ok' patronising stuff that some flood threads with to be '****e' as well. Where in the rules does it say positive ****e is ok but negative isnt?

What's it got to do with stomach? Forums are here to discuss LFC related topics. Nowhere does it say there's only room for positive views. If repeating the same thing isnt allowed, then that same rule must apply for the overly positive stuff that some of us find patronising.

Thanks.

gotta agree with this.

we have had a 20million pound striker sit on our bench for a fair amount of time when it appears apparent to everybody else he should be playing despite his form

[Vermilion]

Some of us find the 'everythings ok' patronising stuff that some flood threads with to be '****e' as well. Where in the rules does it say positive ****e is ok but negative isnt?

What's it got to do with stomach? Forums are here to discuss LFC related topics. Nowhere does it say there's only room for positive views. If repeating the same thing isnt allowed, then that same rule must apply for the overly positive stuff that some of us find patronising.

Thanks.

You really are a piece of work, 'everythings ok' my arse, who of the so called positive posters say 'everythings ok', your twisting it again, or ignoring it i don't know, but trying not to be a defeatist loser is not in my eyes being positive at all, it's just where we are at today, we have not lost, we may do, but we haven't yet, the fact that all is not perfect at present and we can do better is where most get the positiveness from, we know we can play better and have, you give up if you like.

And as for the repetition, i see positiveness all over, whereas the negativity always comes from the same place.

[Redspin]

They're top players who score goals mate and they represent the best attacking options they have.

Dress it up how you wish, when they need a winner, they put 4 attackers on the park, when we need one, we leave attackers on the bench.

But you used them as an example of a team that plays lots of strikers. Now you're saying "attackers". Make your mind up. Perhaps you can tell me what's the difference. Besides which they didn't put four "attackers" - to use your modified argument - on the pitch as some example of tactical genius, they started the game and weren't deployed because they weren't winning. So it's not at all analogous with our leaving "attackers" (Babel?) on the bench against Everton.

By your definition Benayoun must called an attacker too and he came on - a direct consequence of which was he made a poor challenge leading directly to their goal.

What's more we started - or "put" Torres and Keane on from the start, along with Reira and Kuyt, who are also attackers - that's four by my reckoning, and let's not forget about Gerrard who, like Ronaldo, is an attacking midfielder.

Also, Man U's attackers have hardly been banging them in. Torres missed 13-14 league games but has as many league goals as Berbatov, is just one behind Rooney and three behind Ronaldo, whose goals include penalties and direct free-kicks. Keane is also on the same number as Berbatov as far as I recall (5). So I fail to see how Man U's "attackers", given their modest scoring achievements this season have made much more of an impression than Liverpool's. As Rafa said, I'm talking about facts here.

[Redspin]

Is it luck though? It happens time and time again. The fact is, they have a superbly strong defence, so teams find it hard to score against them. And they have 4 matchwinners, and are happy to use them all at once if necessary. So chances are, when they need a goal, one of their matchwinners will inevitably deliver, because they go all out and they push & push and eventually, force the issue. It's not luck, they break their backs going forward and piling on the pressure, they load up 5 or 6 men into the opposition box when they go forward and they play with a high tempo. Consequently, they invariably find a winning goal.

If they played with 1 or 2 matchwinners, with only one striker and sat back, they'd struggle to score goals. Bit like us.

So in another post you say it's all about their attacking options that makes the difference, but now it's their "superbly strong defence" - which is it? And if they pile all this pressure on and get so many men in the box, why have they scored fewer goals than Liverpool?

In the vast majority of their games they play just one striker - Berbatov (5 league goals so far) - with another in the hole, Rooney or Tevez usually, the formation favoured by all top teams. Maybe you'd also like to define what a "matchwinner" is too. Is it the same as a "striker" or an "attacker", or is it anyone who can score a goal? I'm curious.

[Redspin]

Copied this post from another forum and i think it sums up how i feel:

But with all this alleged positivity in their play, why do they score fewer goals than us?