Rafa wants Liverpool FC to attack at home next season

[Craig_H]

So he shouldn't have been on the bench then, he may have phrased it better.

When you're chasing a goal, you'd want someone who is likely to score that goal on the pitch. Put him on the bench by all means, but subs are there to make a positive impact if you're in need of one.

Keane was purchased at great expense and a significant reason for this would've been his goalscoring record and the notion that he'd be able to do the same for us.

Having done all that and having him as an option, seeing him just sitting there picking splints when others with no sort of goalscoring pedigree haplessly run about trying to find a winner, was incredibly frustrating to me and many others.

Let's not have a Fredo/Craig hoo-ha over nothing again

Christ, i've not even been here for three weeks, cut me some slack dude.

[Guest]

So why spunk a huge amount of money on him in the first place then?

Bit of a hefty mistake from Rafa, no?

Mistake quickly corrected though; sold him sharpishly 6 months later.

[Delinquent]

So why spunk a huge amount of money on him in the first place then?

Bit of a hefty mistake from Rafa, no?

I thought the word was that Keane was a Parry signing. It would certainly explain Rafa's staunch reluctance to play him, and his subsequent departure just half-way through the season.

[Craig_H]

Mistake quickly corrected though; sold him sharpishly 6 months later.

At a considerable loss. We're not in the position whereby we can just write-off a few million quid without thinking about it, so it was still a costly and damaging exercise.

I thought the word was that Keane was a Parry signing. It would certainly explain Rafa's staunch reluctance to play him, and his subsequent departure just half-way through the season.

If Parry had signed keane without rafa wanting him, i think Rafa would've walked. I think Rafa wanted him.

[little dave hedgehog]

Problem with keane was that he had a great pedigree, but was in the process of destroying it in the fastest way imaginable. How many times was he set up in the box and he failed to even connect with the ball when he tried to have a hit?

Yes he did score a couple of nice ones, but with all the sitters he missed, I know who I wouldn't want what could be the only chance to win the game falling to, price tag or no.

[Kenneth]

I thought the word was that Keane was a Parry signing. It would certainly explain Rafa's staunch reluctance to play him, and his subsequent departure just half-way through the season.

True, but that word could have been 'bull****', we don't know. I think the fact that he clearly wasn't working and there was an opportunity to rob spurs for almost as much as they'd robbed us were enough reasons for his departure mid season. We'd have got very little for him if we'd let him embarrass himself for another 6 months.

[little dave hedgehog]

Also he was a mediocre festival band at best. Way too much piano.

[Redspin]

When you're chasing a goal, you'd want someone who is likely to score that goal on the pitch. Put him on the bench by all means, but subs are there to make a positive impact if you're in need of one.

Keane was purchased at great expense and a significant reason for this would've been his goalscoring record and the notion that he'd be able to do the same for us.

Having done all that and having him as an option, seeing him just sitting there picking splints when others with no sort of goalscoring pedigree haplessly run about trying to find a winner, was incredibly frustrating to me and many others.



Christ, i've not even been here for three weeks, cut me some slack dude.

It was incredibly frustrating to many more of us to see the useless **** on the pitch at any time. He couldn't trap a bag of cement; his first touch was on a par with Carlton Palmer's; and I've never seen a so-called top striker miss so many easy chances.

On the bench he could do less damage. At least Rafa saw sense very quickly and offloaded him pronto.

One thing to remember is that you can't legislate for goalkeepers playing out of their skin. You can have as may strikers as you like and if the goalie's on top form there's nothing you can do about it - as was the case in a number of the home draws. It wasn't for a lack of attacking ambition that we failed to win those seven drawn games. We were usually well on top and giving it everything

[Craig_H]

It was incredibly frustrating to many more of us to see the useless **** on the pitch at any time. He couldn't trap a bag of cement; his first touch was on a par with Carlton Palmer's; and I've never seen a so-called top striker miss so many easy chances.

On the bench he could do less damage. At least Rafa saw sense very quickly and offloaded him pronto.

One thing to remember is that you can't legislate for goalkeepers playing out of their skin. You can have as may strikers as you like and if the goalie's on top form there's nothing you can do about it - as was the case in a number of the home draws. It wasn't for a lack of attacking ambition that we failed to win those seven drawn games. We were usually well on top and giving it everything

Fulham game - 6 shots on target:

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/match?id=242783&cc=5739

West Ham game - 6 shots on target:

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/match?id=246339&cc=5739

Everton PL game - 2 shots on target:

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/match?id=243338&cc=5739

Man City game - 3 shots on target:

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/match?id=243713&cc=5739

Stoke game - 6 shots on target:

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/match?id=242154&cc=5739

Hull City game - 5 shots on target:

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/match?id=242993&cc=5739

Those kind of stats do not suggest to me that any of those keepers were required to play out of their skin and produce save after save.

In 3 hours against City and Everton, we hit the target 5 times. That's woeful.

As for Keane, i agree he was shocking. And Rafa chose to buy him, which makes it a costly mistake in my book.

[Guest]

As for Keane, i agree he was shocking. And Rafa chose to buy him, which makes it a costly mistake in my book.

Oh move on FFS, Robbie Keane's stats were fantastic prior to his move to us and he was the correct signing on paper. Every transfer has an element of risk and if you don't take any risks you're going to end up with nothing.

Rafa's made a mistake and it won't be the last, so what. Move on.

[Craig_H]

Oh move on FFS, Robbie Keane's stats were fantastic prior to his move to us and he was the correct signing on paper. Every transfer has an element of risk and if you don't take any risks you're going to end up with nothing.

Rafa's made a mistake and it won't be the last, so what. Move on.

You move on mate, with regards to replying to my posts.

Attacking more at home will be beneficial, we should've done it last year but we didnt. We saw a £20m striker sat on the bench when a goal was needed and people are suggesting this was because he was ****e. Which i agree with. Hence, we look towards why such a poor signing was made and how this may have cost us. It's called discussion and analysis. If you dont wish to partake, that's your choice, but dont make mine for me.

[Guest]

You move on mate, with regards to replying to my posts.

Attacking more at home will be beneficial, we should've done it last year but we didnt. We saw a £20m striker sat on the bench when a goal was needed and people are suggesting this was because he was ****e. Which i agree with. Hence, we look towards why such a poor signing was made and how this may have cost us. It's called discussion and analysis. If you dont wish to partake, that's your choice, but dont make mine for me.

But you've made your point a long long time ago, why keep on banging the same thing? I'm only refuting something you've been refuting for a long time.

And don't be such a sensitive *******.

[Craig_H]

But you've made your point a long long time ago, why keep on banging the same thing? I'm only refuting something you've been refuting for a long time.

And don't be such a sensitive *******.

I'm discussing it, because it's relevant to this thread, about attacking more at home next season, with the hope of improving upon the season just gone. In which case, a comparison to what happened last year is perfectly valid.

I'm not sensitive, i'd just like you to put me on ignore, for all our sakes.

I'll remind you about sensitivity when i next irritate you a fraction of the amount you irritate me and others.

You see the difference is, when you post stuff which i find boring or whatever, i ignore you and i dont try to question your right to do so. Try it.

[Guest]

I'm discussing it, because it's relevant to this thread, about attacking more at home next season, with the hope of improving upon the season just gone. In which case, a comparison to what happened last year is perfectly valid.

I'm not sensitive, i'd just like you to put me on ignore, for all our sakes.

But why don't you put me on ignore?

You're sensitive and you know it, you're just an argumentative *******. You could kick out a fuss arguing with yourself.

[Craig_H]

But why don't you put me on ignore?

You're sensitive and you know it, you're just an argumentative *******. You could kick out a fuss arguing with yourself.

Re-read my post above - it's because i dont feel the need to follow you around telling you what you can/should/cant/shouldnt post, because i might find it boring.

If you just ignored the 'boring' stuff i posted, instead of calling the shots, it'd be much better all round.

I'm not remotely sensitive by the way, i just find you to be a tiresome presence, which is why i'd rather you just never replied to my posts.