Stoke City vs Liverpool FC post match thread

[Mostar]

Few more

[PTP]

always knew this was going to be a tough game but disappointed with the result.

We need Steven Gerrard back in the squad.

[Nick77]

Match Stats Bolton Man United:
Shots (on Goal) 22(6) 14(8)
Possession 42% 58%
Corner 5 7

Stoke Liverpool:
Shots (on Goal) 3(1) 24(7)
Possession 27% 73%
Corner 2 12

Typical ****en Scum & I hate to say it typical us too - I have seen a lot of stats like ours against Stoke where we've failed to take our countless opportunities & lost...

[Maxiedge]

Thought I 'd watch it again before passing judgement but there's no ****ing way that was a penalty. It was a foul on Carragher.

Robbed of a point/3 points.

[Mostar]

Tomkins article this morning

http://tomkinstimes.com/2011/09/kenny-dalglish-is-ruining-liverpool/

Kenny Dalglish Is Ruining Liverpool.

Maybe it’s the incredible start made by the Manchester clubs, or maybe it’s just that there are a lot of idiots out there. But I cannot abide the doom and gloom that follows one bad result, particularly when it was not a bad performance.

It’s not just the knee-jerk fans on Twitter, whose reaction to anything less than 114 points a season is rapid implosion; two respected broadsheet newspapers ran execrable pieces on the Stoke game.

Russell Kempson, writing in the Independent, sets the scene by paraphrasing Liverpool fans:

“Kenny Dalglish, Liverpool legend. He rescued us from Roy Hodgson and will return us to the promised land of a top-four finish in the League and a natural resumption of Champions League hostilities in 2011-12. Our rightful place, where we belong.”
Having set Dalglish up to be a man who can do no wrong in the eyes of Kopites, he then says:

“But the facts – as yet – do not back up the blinkered idolatry. The defeat against Stoke City here on Saturday was Liverpool’s eighth loss in 28 matches since Dalglish sifted through the Hodgson debris and embarked on his emergency salvage operation.”
Eight defeats? Sounds bad. Sounds terrible. Sack him! What’s next, Russell?

“Perhaps 14 wins and six draws are the better stats to view…”
Incredible – just truly incredible. Why would you focus first on the negative, taking it out of context of the overall picture, which is not negative when view as a whole? Surely the wins, draws and defeats are all part of one single reality?

The amount of games lost has no bearing on league success; the table works on points won. You could lose 8 games and win 30, and you’d win the title. (Liverpool lost only 2 games in 2008/09, fewer than the champions, but that didn’t stop Rafa getting criticised; Liverpool were excellent that season, but sadly for us, United were slightly better.)

Kempson sets the scene with talk of the top four. His entire argument, set out by that paragraph, relates to qualifying for the Champions League. So why isn’t he focusing on league form? Why is he including the Europa League, which was of little consequence last season, and cup games, which included a visit to Old Trafford as soon as the manager had stepped into the breach? You don’t qualify for the Champions League by winning cups.

Liverpool, who currently sit 5th (miles away from the top four, clearly, although my maths can’t calculate the distance), have won 40 points in 22 games since Dalglish returned.

Over 38 games, that would equate to 69 points. And in the history of the Premier League since four spots were available, 69 points has meant certain Champions League qualification.

Let’s go back, and remind ourselves of what Kempson said:

“But the facts – as yet – do not back up the blinkered idolatry.”
… Except they do, if the blinkered idolatry referred to was outlined in the opening gambit. I mean, if you’re going to use facts, at least get the bloody things right.

But there’s more. This is 69 points (pro rata) achieved without Steven Gerrard for all but a couple of games.

It is 69 points (pro rata) achieved with an injury crisis at the end of last season, and a squad that included a mix of the sublime, the good and bad signed by Rafa, and the raft of duds signed by Hodgson, none of whom feature anymore. It included a month with no fit strikers, as Fernando Torres slung his hook.

It also ignores the fact that Liverpool absolutely smothered Stoke, with the vast majority of the possession, territory, shots (11 on target to one for Stoke – the penalty) and corners, but a case when finishing, rather than tactics, let the club down. Had the incredible Luis Suarez not missed a good chance at the death – in keeping with when Steven Gerrard hit the post at 0-0 on the same ground with the last kick of the game following ‘Rafa’s rant’ – then there’d be no story here. Instead, there’s a storm.

Whether or not Dalglish repays the fans’ faith and idolatry is yet to be decided. But so far, all the evidence – which Kempson refers to, but fails to correctly analyse – actually disproves the author’s own thesis. (Or, should that be, half-arsed idea scratched on the back of a fag packet?)

Dalglish took over when the Reds were 12th. He took them up to 6th, and now has the team sitting 5th. Obviously this is the clear pattern of a man who doesn’t know what he’s doing – who is ruining our club while we blindly sing his praises.

But it gets worse. Writing in the Guardian, Sachin Nakrani said:

“…That may come as a relief to the 60-year-old [Dalglish] but for his admirers there may remain concern over his loss of temper, the sense, even, that for the second time in two decades the task of managing Liverpool is proving too great a responsibility for the club’s greatest player.”
Wow. I mean, seriously. Wow. Manager loses temper after defeat and shows frustration with officials. It can only mean one thing: he’s having a nervous breakdown and cannot handle the pressure.

In which case, roughly half of the Premier League’s managers have a nervous breakdown every weekend, and come May, each and every one of them therefore needs be sectioned for his (and society’s) safety.

To bring up Dalglish’s post-Hillsborough stress is despicable. In the aftermath of the tragedy his management was affected, because he was still living amidst the consequences and was physically ill from the stress of having to deal with the deaths of almost 100 Liverpool fans. But 22 years have passed. If anything, the experience should now make him stronger and wiser. To any sane observer, that seems to be the case.

When things aren’t going his way, Alex Ferguson rants and raves at journalists, swearing at them, and when he’s upset with his players he throws boots in their faces, but he’s just a winner, showing his winning mentality; not ‘losing the plot’ in the way that others are when they show a bit of emotion. Dalglish moans that, for the 4th game running the Reds have been denied either a penalty or an opposition red card, and he’s having some kind of mental collapse that suggests he can’t handle the job. Whether or not he is right about the refereeing decisions, he’s just doing what managers do.

So, dear readers, I apologise for my optimism under Dalglish, which has seen me claim that the Reds can reach the top four under his guidance, after the nightmare of being a bottom-half team last season before his arrival.

Clearly, having read this morning’s newspapers, he’s ruining Liverpool, and needs to be sacked forthwith. I hear that Roy Hodgson won a game this weekend; presumably he’s now the man for the job?

[Neil Young]

Yes, I thought the spin being put on Dalglish's reaction, questioning his fortitude, was an appalling piece of journalism and betrays someone who understands nothing about Hillsborough or, very possibly, much else besides.

[Kronenburg1892]

Does anyone know who John Motsen supports? Apart from Roy Hodgson.

Regardless, a waste of a sheep pelt imo.

The Stoke game was too early in the season for us to get a result there. Especially after an international week. You can bet that most top four teams will be training in a field of wheat after a heavy rainfall before they get anything out of that hole. **** 'em, we'll trash them when they come to a pitch that hasn't been pasted with glue.

I wanted Coates to get a run out, but then it would have been hard to give Carra a vote of no confidence by a sub in the 60th minute. But it does highlight that Jamie needs to face up to the fact that he is becoming a liability. Tough one, how do you sub him out with dignity. That I fear is going to be a potential problem. Kenny has already backed him.

The positive I will take out of the game, was that we battered their box with quite a few not on top form.

[BringbackBiscan]

Don't see no reason to worry about this game at all. We battered them and 99 times out of 100 we'd have won that one. It's a notoriously hard game for us and even the season we finished second they were the better side at their ground. It's the first time I've ever felt we deserved anything at the Britannia tbh.

Onwards and upwards and as weird as it sounds I think spuds will be an easier game. Arry is tactically naive and they play very open football which will suit us. Some team is going to be on the bad end of a beating soon when things click for us.

[topscorer]

Such a shame we never got the result we deserved for this game. What a difference it would have made to how the table looks now.

I hope we batter Spurs next week.

[Carras_Shin_Pads]

We didn't play particularly well but we dominated the game

................LFC.....SCFC
Possession..72.6%..27.4%
Shots.........14........2
On target.....8.........1
Corners.......12........2

I can't believe we lost

I thought we were poor in some area, final ball was poor at time, we wasted some very good chances. But if we had won that game by a couple of goals I don't think anyone could have had any complaints, we were unlucky IMO

Fair play to Stoke they defended extremely well, they got their goal and parked the bus very effectively

That's crazy stats!

[Craig_H]

Liverpool FC denied "definite penalty" at Stoke, admits Pulis
by Richard Buxton. Published Tue 13 Sep 2011 15:00, Last updated: 2011-09-13

Tony Pulis admits that Liverpool were denied a "definite penalty" against Stoke.

Two spot kick claims went unanswered by referee Mark Clattenburg during the Reds' 1-0 defeat on Saturday after Rory Delap and Matthew Upson appeared guilty of handling in their own area.

However Clattenburg awarded a penalty to the home side after Jamie Carragher pulled Jonathan Walters down by the hip, with his resulting kick ultimately handing Stoke maximum points.

Kop boss Kenny Dalglish has been vocal about possible plans to raise the issue of contentious decisions being awarded against his side with the Professional Game Match Officials Board (PGMO).

And Pulis has admitted that his Anfield counterpart has grounds for complaint by admitting that Potters midfielder Delap was culpable but dismissed the penalty claims surrounding Upson.

He said: "I think Rory's was a definite penalty looking at it.

"On the day from where I was I thought it wasn't, but Rory's was a definite penalty.

"Matthew Upson's comes off his thigh onto his hand and I don't think it is a penalty.

"Kenny's got to do what he has got to do and I am not going to tell Kenny what to do or I am not going to tell Liverpool Football Club what to do, they have to do what they have to do.

"I spoke to [PGMO chief] Mike Riley last year on a couple of occasions and Mike was first class.

"We have a procedure to go through and I am sure Kenny will go through the same procedure."

[Shaggy]

Still seething to be honest. We're due some ****ing terrible decisions to go our way.

[BringbackBiscan]

Am I the only one who thinks none of the handballs were penalty's? It happened fast and Delap never moved his arm/hand in the direction of the ball, neither did Upson. So surely the ball has played him.

I've seen them given before. Once against Carra (i think) last season but that doesn't make it right. The problem with refereeing in this league is there's no consistency, all three of those penalty decision's could have opposite decisions given next weekend.

Felt their pen as well was a 50/50 decision that could have went either way, there looked to be a foul on Carra first but he stayed on feet meaning the foul was never going to be given. Poor piece of defending to get into that position in the first place.

Bottom line is poor finishing cost us dearly.

[Kenneth]

Didn't see the upson one clearly, but I didn't think the delap one was a pen. I thought theirs was certainly a pen.

[danperkins]

Personally i didn't think any of our claims were penos, and that theirs was. But also thought Clattenburg had a stinker too, so many little decisions went against us, but we have only ourselves to blame game should have be wrapped.